OBJECTIVES: To compare subcutaneous "Z"-stitch versus manual compression in attaining hemostasis after large bore femoral venous access, and to assess its impact on venous patency. BACKGROUND: Structural interventions increasingly require large caliber venous access, for which convenient, safe, and effective method of postprocedural hemostasis is needed. "Z"-stitch has been introduced for this purpose in some centers but systematic data on its performance is limited. METHODS: This single center study randomized consecutive patients with femoral venous access sites requiring ≥10F sheaths to the "Z"-stitch or manual compression for hemostasis in a 2:1 fashion. There were three co-primary endpoints: time to hemostasis, time to ambulation, and a composite safety endpoint comprising vascular access site complications. Groin Doppler-Duplex was performed with the stitch in place and after its removal. RESULTS:86 consecutive patients with 90 access sites were randomized. Mean age was 61.7 ± 19.1 years, 33.3% were men. Median sheath size was 14 F (range 10-22 F). Patients randomized to "Z"-stitch achieved hemostasis quicker [<1 min vs. 12.0 (IQR 10.0-15.0) min, P < 0.001] and ambulated sooner [7.0 (IQR 4.0-12.0) vs. 16.0 (IQR 11.8-20.3) hr post procedure, P < 0.001] when compared with manual compression alone. The "Z"-stitch reduced rates of access site complications (OR = 0.27, 95%CI 0.09-0.76, P = 0.01). All imaged veins were patent before and after stitch removal. CONCLUSIONS: The "Z"-stitch is a safe and effective method of achieving hemostasis after large bore femoral venous sheath removal and results in faster hemostasis, early patient ambulation and less access site complications, without compromising vein patency when compared with manual compression alone.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To compare subcutaneous "Z"-stitch versus manual compression in attaining hemostasis after large bore femoral venous access, and to assess its impact on venous patency. BACKGROUND: Structural interventions increasingly require large caliber venous access, for which convenient, safe, and effective method of postprocedural hemostasis is needed. "Z"-stitch has been introduced for this purpose in some centers but systematic data on its performance is limited. METHODS: This single center study randomized consecutive patients with femoral venous access sites requiring ≥10F sheaths to the "Z"-stitch or manual compression for hemostasis in a 2:1 fashion. There were three co-primary endpoints: time to hemostasis, time to ambulation, and a composite safety endpoint comprising vascular access site complications. Groin Doppler-Duplex was performed with the stitch in place and after its removal. RESULTS: 86 consecutive patients with 90 access sites were randomized. Mean age was 61.7 ± 19.1 years, 33.3% were men. Median sheath size was 14 F (range 10-22 F). Patients randomized to "Z"-stitch achieved hemostasis quicker [<1 min vs. 12.0 (IQR 10.0-15.0) min, P < 0.001] and ambulated sooner [7.0 (IQR 4.0-12.0) vs. 16.0 (IQR 11.8-20.3) hr post procedure, P < 0.001] when compared with manual compression alone. The "Z"-stitch reduced rates of access site complications (OR = 0.27, 95%CI 0.09-0.76, P = 0.01). All imaged veins were patent before and after stitch removal. CONCLUSIONS: The "Z"-stitch is a safe and effective method of achieving hemostasis after large bore femoral venous sheath removal and results in faster hemostasis, early patient ambulation and less access site complications, without compromising vein patency when compared with manual compression alone.
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Saenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Aidan J C Burrell; Joshua F Ihle; Vincent A Pellegrino; Jayne Sheldrake; Paul T Nixon Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Sáenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: Europace Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Moghniuddin Mohammed; Rigoberto Ramirez; Daniel A Steinhaus; Omair K Yousuf; Michael J Giocondo; Brian M Ramza; Alan P Wimmer; Sanjaya K Gupta Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2021-04-02 Impact factor: 1.759
Authors: Brian Karahalios; Stephanie F Rojas; Rahul Singh; Miguel C Cavazos; Ponraj Chinnadurai; C Huie Lin Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2019-12-18 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Christoph J Jensen; Miriam Schnur; Sebastian Lask; Philipp Attanasio; Michal Gotzmann; Kaffer Kara; Christoph Hanefeld; Andreas Mügge; Alexander Wutzler Journal: Int J Med Sci Date: 2020-04-06 Impact factor: 3.738