Vascular Closure Devices Attenuate Femoral Access Complications of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Objectives: To compare severe complications related to radial access and those related to femoral access using vascular closure devices for patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Background: Femoral artery access is still used for acute myocardial infarction management; studies comparing state-of-the-art radial and femoral techniques are required to minimize bias regarding the outcomes associated with operator preferences.

Methods: We performed a randomized study comparing radial access with a compression device and anatomic landmark-guided femoral access with a hemostatic vascular closure device.

Comparison of a vascular closure device versus the radial approach to reduce access site complications in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients: The angio-seal versus the radial approach in acute coronary syndrome trial.

Objectives: To compare the radial versus femoral approach using Angio-Seal for the incidence of access site complications among non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing invasive strategy.

Background: Arterial access is a major site of complications after invasive coronary procedures. Vascular closure devices provide more comfort to patients decreasing time to hemostasis and need for bed rest.

Femoral versus radial access in primary angioplasty. Analysis of the ACCEPT registry.

Background: The radial access provides a lower risk of bleeding and vascular complications related to the puncture site in comparison to the femoral access. Recent studies have suggested a reduction in mortality associated with the radial access in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Objective: To compare the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients undergoing primary angioplasty according to the type of arterial access route.

Design and rationale of the AngioSeal versus the Radial approach In acute coronary SyndromE (ARISE) trial: a randomized comparison of a vascular closure device versus the radial approach to prevent vascular access site complications in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients.

Background: Arterial access is a major site of bleeding complications after invasive coronary procedures. Among strategies to decrease vascular complications, the radial approach is an established one. Vascular closure devices provide more comfort to patients and decrease hemostasis and need for bed rest.