BACKGROUND: The use of extravascular femoral closure devices in patients undergoing coronary angiography/intervention has not been sufficiently evaluated. We sought to define the impact of an extravascular polyglycolic acid (PGA) plug for the closure of a femoral access site in patients undergoing coronary angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: In this prospective, single-blind, multicenter trial we randomly assigned 319 patients tovessel closure with Angio-Seal(®) or Exo-Seal(®). We hypothesized that the use of an extravascular closure device is not inferior to an anchor/plug-mediated device regarding the occurrence of the composite primary endpoint: hematoma > 5 cm, significant groin bleeding (TIMI major bleed), false aneurysm, and device failure. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in patient baseline characteristics or procedural results. After 24 h the primary endpoint occurred in nine patients (5.6 %) in the Angio-Seal(®) group and in 13 patients (8.2 %) inthe Exo-Seal(®) group (p = 0.38). Hematoma > 5 cm was noted in three patients (1.9 %) receiving Angio-Seal(®) vs. two patients (1.3 %) receiving Exo-Seal(®) (p = 0.99). In one patient (0.6 %) of the Exo-Seal(®) group, TIMI major bleeding occurred, requiring transfusion (p = 0.49). There were four (2.5 %) false aneurysms found in patients treated with Angio-Seal(®) and two (1.3 %) in patients treated with Exo-Seal(®) (p = 0.68). There was a trend for a higher incidence of device failure in the Exo-Seal(®) group (1.2 vs. 5.2 %, p = 0.06). At telephone interview after 30 days, there was no significant difference found regarding the events readmission with surgery of puncture site, infection, bleeding, hematoma, or pain. CONCLUSION: In the present study, there were no significant differences found regarding the occurrence of hematoma > 5 cm, major bleeding, false aneurysm, and device failure between Angio-Seal(®) and Exo-Seal(®) 24 h after device implantation.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The use of extravascular femoral closure devices in patients undergoing coronary angiography/intervention has not been sufficiently evaluated. We sought to define the impact of an extravascular polyglycolic acid (PGA) plug for the closure of a femoral access site in patients undergoing coronary angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: In this prospective, single-blind, multicenter trial we randomly assigned 319 patients to vessel closure with Angio-Seal(®) or Exo-Seal(®). We hypothesized that the use of an extravascular closure device is not inferior to an anchor/plug-mediated device regarding the occurrence of the composite primary endpoint: hematoma > 5 cm, significant groin bleeding (TIMI major bleed), false aneurysm, and device failure. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in patient baseline characteristics or procedural results. After 24 h the primary endpoint occurred in nine patients (5.6 %) in the Angio-Seal(®) group and in 13 patients (8.2 %) inthe Exo-Seal(®) group (p = 0.38). Hematoma > 5 cm was noted in three patients (1.9 %) receiving Angio-Seal(®) vs. two patients (1.3 %) receiving Exo-Seal(®) (p = 0.99). In one patient (0.6 %) of the Exo-Seal(®) group, TIMI major bleeding occurred, requiring transfusion (p = 0.49). There were four (2.5 %) false aneurysms found in patients treated with Angio-Seal(®) and two (1.3 %) in patients treated with Exo-Seal(®) (p = 0.68). There was a trend for a higher incidence of device failure in the Exo-Seal(®) group (1.2 vs. 5.2 %, p = 0.06). At telephone interview after 30 days, there was no significant difference found regarding the events readmission with surgery of puncture site, infection, bleeding, hematoma, or pain. CONCLUSION: In the present study, there were no significant differences found regarding the occurrence of hematoma > 5 cm, major bleeding, false aneurysm, and device failure between Angio-Seal(®) and Exo-Seal(®) 24 h after device implantation.
Authors: Dale R Tavris; Beverly Albrecht Gallauresi; Ba Lin; Suzanne E Rich; Richard E Shaw; William S Weintraub; Ralph G Brindis; Kathleen Hewitt Journal: J Invasive Cardiol Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 2.022
Authors: Eugenia Nikolsky; Roxana Mehran; Amir Halkin; Eve D Aymong; Gary S Mintz; Zoran Lasic; Manuela Negoita; Martin Fahy; Shoshana Krieger; Issam Moussa; Jeffrey W Moses; Gregg W Stone; Martin B Leon; Stuart J Pocock; George Dangas Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Robert J Applegate; Matthew T Sacrinty; Michael A Kutcher; Talal T Baki; Sanjay K Gandhi; Renato M Santos; William C Little Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Jack M Boschewitz; Magnus Andersson; Claas P Naehle; Hans H Schild; Kai Wilhelm; Carsten Meyer Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Winthrop D Piper; David J Malenka; Thomas J Ryan; Samuel J Shubrooks; Gerald T O'Connor; John F Robb; Karen L Farrell; Mary S Corliss; Michael J Hearne; Mirle A Kellett; Matthew W Watkins; William A Bradley; Bruce D Hettleman; Theodore M Silver; Paul D McGrath; John R O'Mears; David E Wennberg Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Sigmund Silber; Per Albertsson; Francisco F Avilés; Paolo G Camici; Antonio Colombo; Christian Hamm; Erik Jørgensen; Jean Marco; Jan-Erik Nordrehaug; Witold Ruzyllo; Philip Urban; Gregg W Stone; William Wijns Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2005-03-15 Impact factor: 29.983