PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, primary failure rates, and complications for the Angio-Seal and Perclose closure devices in antegrade and retrograde common femoral artery (CFA) punctures during peripheral angioplasty procedures. METHODS: A retrospective single-center analysis was conducted between April 2002 and June 2006 of all patients who had a CFA puncture and no other intervention planned during the same admission. Patients undergoing thrombolysis were excluded. Of 215 punctures in 191 patients, 123 closures in 97 patients (82 men; mean age 69.5 +/-10.4 years, range 41-93) were eligible for analysis. Of these, 49 punctures were antegrade and 74 were retrograde. An Angio-Seal device was used in 40 closures, while 83 punctures were closed with a Perclose device. Deployment outcomes and complications were compared between devices for each puncture direction and between antegrade and retrograde punctures. RESULTS: Seventy-eight (63.4%) of the 123 closures reached the primary endpoint of complication-free progress to discharge, comprising 30 (61.2%) of the 49 antegrade closures and 48 (64.9%) of the 74 retrograde closures. There was no significant difference between the devices for the primary endpoint. Twenty-two (17.9%) attempted closures failed. Forty-one (33.3%) closures had a complication after the procedure, but none required further intervention. In antegrade closures, Angio-Seal had a significantly lower rate of primary failure (11.1% versus 38.7% for Perclose, p = 0.038). Antegrade closures had a higher rate of primary failure (p<0.01); however, this did not translate into any significant differences in postprocedural complications. No significant differences in primary failure or complication rates were found between the devices when used in retrograde punctures. CONCLUSION: Angio-Seal had a lower rate of primary failure than Perclose in antegrade puncture closures. We believe this reinforces the need for larger studies to compare closure devices in antegrade punctures.
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, primary failure rates, and complications for the Angio-Seal and Perclose closure devices in antegrade and retrograde common femoral artery (CFA) punctures during peripheral angioplasty procedures. METHODS: A retrospective single-center analysis was conducted between April 2002 and June 2006 of all patients who had a CFA puncture and no other intervention planned during the same admission. Patients undergoing thrombolysis were excluded. Of 215 punctures in 191 patients, 123 closures in 97 patients (82 men; mean age 69.5 +/-10.4 years, range 41-93) were eligible for analysis. Of these, 49 punctures were antegrade and 74 were retrograde. An Angio-Seal device was used in 40 closures, while 83 punctures were closed with a Perclose device. Deployment outcomes and complications were compared between devices for each puncture direction and between antegrade and retrograde punctures. RESULTS: Seventy-eight (63.4%) of the 123 closures reached the primary endpoint of complication-free progress to discharge, comprising 30 (61.2%) of the 49 antegrade closures and 48 (64.9%) of the 74 retrograde closures. There was no significant difference between the devices for the primary endpoint. Twenty-two (17.9%) attempted closures failed. Forty-one (33.3%) closures had a complication after the procedure, but none required further intervention. In antegrade closures, Angio-Seal had a significantly lower rate of primary failure (11.1% versus 38.7% for Perclose, p = 0.038). Antegrade closures had a higher rate of primary failure (p<0.01); however, this did not translate into any significant differences in postprocedural complications. No significant differences in primary failure or complication rates were found between the devices when used in retrograde punctures. CONCLUSION: Angio-Seal had a lower rate of primary failure than Perclose in antegrade puncture closures. We believe this reinforces the need for larger studies to compare closure devices in antegrade punctures.