Efficacy and safety of kaolin-based hemostatic pad vs. standard mechanical compression following transradial and transulnar access for elective coronary angiography and PCI: RAUL trial substudy

Hemostatic devices used in the transradial approach (TRA) and transulnar approach (TUA) are limited. This study compared the efficacy and safety of hemostasis using the QuikClot Radial hemostatic pad (QC) vs. standard mechanical compression (SC) after coronary angiography (CAG). This prospective sin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Heart and vessels 2020-04, Vol.35 (4), p.502-508
Hauptverfasser: Pawel, Lewandowski, Dagmara, Gralak-Lachowska, Pawel, Maciejewski, Bogumil, Ramotowski, Andrzej, Budaj, Sebastian, Stec
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Hemostatic devices used in the transradial approach (TRA) and transulnar approach (TUA) are limited. This study compared the efficacy and safety of hemostasis using the QuikClot Radial hemostatic pad (QC) vs. standard mechanical compression (SC) after coronary angiography (CAG). This prospective single-center randomized trial included CAG patients. The primary and secondary endpoints were efficacy (successful hemostasis) and safety (total artery occlusion [TAO], pseudoaneurysm, hematoma), respectively. A visual analog scale (VAS) evaluated patient pain during compression. In 2013–2017, 200 patients were randomized 2 × 2 into the: (1) TRA and TUA groups and (2) QC and SC groups. Successful hemostasis was achieved in 92 (92%) patients in the QC group and 100 (100%) patients in the SC group ( p  
ISSN:0910-8327
1615-2573
DOI:10.1007/s00380-019-01520-z