Background: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vascular closure devices (VCDs) in non-cardiac endovascular interventions.

Methods: Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients submitted to endovascular interventions, with deployment of 2327 vascular closure devices. Demographic, clinical/periprocedural, post-operative, complication and reintervention data were reviewed.

Results: A total of 2107 patients (1409 [66.9%] men) were included. Perclose ProGlide® (Abbott Vascular) was employed 1683 times (72.3%), Angio-Seal™ (St. Jude Medical Inc.) 463 (19.9%) and 181 (7.8%) Exoseal® (Cordis). Patients were 70.4±11 years old. Of all vascular approaches, 1794 were retrograde (77.1%) and 533 antegrade (22.9%), with sheath size ranging from 5 to 8 French. Overall success rate was 95.2% and did not significantly vary according to the device. Overall failure rate was 4.8%, with high puncture site, morbid obesity, previous total anticoagulation and severe calcification being related to worse efficiency results. Major complications occurred in 15 patients (0.6%). All patients were evaluated before discharge from the hospital, and were scheduled to return for ambulatory follow-up visits at 30 days postoperatively. Control duplex ultrasonography was performed on a regular basis, or within this period in case of clinical complain/signs.

Conclusions: Vascular closure devices proved to be safe and effective in this study. Additional prospective randomized studies are recommended.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.23736/S0021-9509.16.09207-7DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

vascular closure
16
closure devices
16
vascular
6
patients
5
single-center experience
4
experience vascular
4
closure
4
devices
4
devices real-world
4
real-world endovascular
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!