Literature DB >> 26015532

Incidence of delayed angiographic femoral artery complications using the EXOSEAL vascular closure device.

Ramesh Grandhi1, Xiaoran Zhang2, David Panczykowski1, Phillip Choi2, Christopher T Hunnicutt3, Ashutosh P Jadhav4, Andrew F Ducruet1, Tudor Jovin5, Brian Jankowitz6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Femoral artery injuries are known complications of percutaneous vascular closure devices (VCDs). We studied the incidence of delayed femoral artery angiographic irregularities after neurointerventional procedures in which the EXOSEAL extravascular closure device was used for femoral arterial puncture closure.
METHODS: Adult patients who underwent femoral arterial puncture closures with an EXOSEAL VCD and had a follow-up femoral artery angiogram from June 2012 through August 2013 were reviewed. A blinded radiologist compared pre-deployment and follow-up femoral arteriograms for the presence of femoral artery stenosis, dissection, pseudoaneurysm, or development of an arteriovenous fistula. Hospital records were reviewed for major or minor complications of the groin site or femoral artery.
RESULTS: The EXOSEAL VCD achieved hemostasis, without evidence of a groin hematoma or requiring subsequent prolonged manual compression, in 400 of 441 closures following transfemoral arterial access, representing a device success rate of 90.7%. A total of 98 patients underwent 102 repeat angiograms following closure with the EXOSEAL VCD. The average time to the repeat angiogram was 73.5 days (range 0-488, median 28). Follow-up femoral arteriography demonstrated an irregularity in seven cases, all of which were vessel stenoses of <50%. There were no dissections, pseudoaneurysms, infections, or ischemic events in the study population.
CONCLUSIONS: Angiographic irregularities were seen in 6.86% of cases after closure with the EXOSEAL VCD. There were no clinically significant vascular complications. Thus, femoral artery closure with EXOSEAL carries a low risk of clinically significant delayed angiographic findings.
© The Author(s) 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EXOSEAL vascular closure device; endovascular intervention; percutaneous femoral arterial puncture; vascular complications

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26015532      PMCID: PMC4757272          DOI: 10.1177/1591019915581776

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol        ISSN: 1591-0199            Impact factor:   1.610


  38 in total

1.  Significant improvements in patient care and cost savings resulting from percutaneous vascular surgery (PVS).

Authors:  E W Rogers; W D Doty; J Stewart
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Manag       Date:  1999 Mar-Apr

2.  A randomised controlled trial of Prostar Plus for haemostasis in patients after coronary angioplasty.

Authors:  T Noguchi; S Miyazaki; S Yasuda; T Baba; H Sumida; I Morii; S Daikoku; Y Goto; H Nonogi
Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 7.069

3.  Comparison of costs and safety of a suture-mediated closure device with conventional manual compression after coronary artery interventions.

Authors:  Hans Rickli; Martin Unterweger; Gabor Sütsch; Hans Peter Brunner-La Rocca; Markus Sagmeister; Peter Ammann; Franz W Amann
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 4.  Review of vascular closure devices.

Authors:  Bryan G Schwartz; Steven Burstein; Christina Economides; Robert A Kloner; David M Shavelle; Guy S Mayeda
Journal:  J Invasive Cardiol       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.022

5.  Vascular complications after percutaneous coronary interventions following hemostasis with manual compression versus arteriotomy closure devices.

Authors:  G Dangas; R Mehran; S Kokolis; D Feldman; L F Satler; A D Pichard; K M Kent; A J Lansky; G W Stone; M B Leon
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Effect of a closure device on complication rates in high-local-risk patients: results of a randomized multicenter trial.

Authors:  Bernard Chevalier; Bernard Lancelin; Rene Koning; Michel Henry; Antoine Gommeaux; Remy Pilliere; Meyer Elbaz; Thierry Lefevre; Kamel Boughalem; Jean Marco; Patrick Dupouy
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Patient tolerance and resource utilization associated with an arterial closure versus an external compression device after percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Craig P Juergens; Dominic Y C Leung; John A Crozier; Adelina M Wong; Jacqui T C Robinson; Sidney Lo; Hashim Kachwalla; Andrew P Hopkins
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 8.  Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterization: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Maria Koreny; Eva Riedmüller; Mariam Nikfardjam; Peter Siostrzonek; Marcus Müllner
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-01-21       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Safety and efficacy of percutaneous femoral artery access followed by Mynx closure in cerebral neurovascular procedures: a single center analysis.

Authors:  Ramesh Grandhi; Hilal Kanaan; Aalap Shah; Gillian Harrison; Christopher Bonfield; Tudor Jovin; Brian Jankowitz; Michael Horowitz
Journal:  J Neurointerv Surg       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 5.836

10.  Triple antiplatelet therapy does not increase femoral access bleeding with vascular closure devices.

Authors:  Jose E Exaire; Harold L Dauerman; Eric J Topol; James C Blankenship; Kathy Wolski; Russell E Raymond; Eric A Cohen; David J Moliterno
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.749

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.