Reduced vascular complications after percutaneous coronary interventions with a nonmechanical suture device: Results from the randomized RACE study†

Access Site Complication Rates Following Peripheral Artery Revascularization in patients With End-Stage Renal Disease: A Comparison of Vascular Closure Devices and Manual Compression

OBJECTIVES

Manual compression (MC) or vascular closure devices (VCDs) are used to achieve hemostasis after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). However, limited data on the comparative safety and effectiveness of VCDs vs MC in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing PTA are available. Accordingly, this study compared the safety and effectiveness of VCD and MC in patients with ESRD undergoing PTA.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study included the data of patients with ESRD undergoing peripheral intervention at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, from January 1, 2019, to June 30, 2022. The patients were divided into VCD and MC groups. The primary endpoint was a composite of puncture site complications, including acute limb ischemia, marked hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, and puncture site bleeding requiring blood transfusion.

RESULTS

We included 264 patients with ESRD undergoing PTA, of whom 60 received a VCD and 204 received MC. The incidence of puncture site complications was 3.3% in the VCD group and 4.4% in the MC group (hazard ratio: .75; 95% confidence interval: .16-3.56 L P = 1.000), indicating no significant between-group difference.

CONCLUSION

VCDs and MC had comparable safety and effectiveness for hemostasis in patients with ESRD undergoing peripheral intervention.

Comparison of manual compression and vascular hemostasis devices after coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention through femoral artery access: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of manual compression (MC) with vascular hemostasis devices (VHD) in patients undergoing coronary angiography (CA) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) through femoral artery access.

INTRODUCTION

The use of femoral artery access for coronary procedures may result in access-related complications, prolonged immobility and discomfort for the patients. MC results in longer time-to-hemostasis (TTH) and time-to-ambulation (TTA) compared to VHDs but its role in access-related complications remains unclear in patients undergoing coronary procedures.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and relevant references for English language randomized controlled trials (RCT) from inception through September 30, 2016. We performed the meta-analysis using random effects model. The outcomes were time-to-hemostasis, time-to-ambulation, major bleeding, large hematoma >5cm, pseudoaneurysm and other adverse events.

RESULTS

The electronic database search resulted in a total of 44 RCTs with a total of 18,802 patients for analysis. MC, compared to VHD resulted in longer TTH [mean difference (MD): 11.21min; 95% confidence interval (CI) 8.13-14.29; P<0.00001] and TTA [standardized mean difference: 1.2 (0.79-1.62); P<0.00001] along with excess risk of hematoma >5cm formation [risk ratio (RR): 1.38 (1.15-1.67); P=0.0008]. MC resulted in similar risk of major bleeding [1.01 (0.64-1.60); P=0.95] pseudoaneurysm [0.99 (0.75-1.29); P=0.92], infections [0.52 (0.25-1.10); P=0.09], need of surgery [0.60 (0.29-1.22); P=0.16), AV fistula [0.93 (0.68-1.27); P=0.63] and ipsilateral leg ischemia [0.95 (0.57-1.60); P=0.86] compared to VHD.

CONCLUSION

Manual compression increase time-to-hemostasis, time-to-ambulation and risk of hematoma formation compared vascular hemostasis devices.

Meta-analysis of randomized trials on the efficacy of vascular closure devices after diagnostic angiography and angioplasty

BACKGROUND

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of vascular closure devices (VCDs).

METHODS

This meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 31 prospective, randomized studies including 7,528 patients who were randomized to VCDs or manual/mechanical compression after diagnostic angiography and/or endovascular procedures. Most of these studies have excluded patients at high risk of puncture site complications. Meta-analysis showed similar results in the study groups in terms of groin hematoma, bleeding, pseudoaneurysm, and blood transfusion. Lower limb ischemia and other arterial ischemic complications (0.3% vs 0%, P = .07) as well as need of surgery for vascular complications (0.7% vs 0.4%, P = .10) were somewhat more frequent with arterial puncture closure devices. The incidence of groin infection was significantly more frequent with VCDs (0.6% vs 0.2%, P = .02). The use of VCD was uniformly associated with a significantly shorter time to hemostasis. Such differences where more evident in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, whereas these methods were associated with similar rates of adverse events among patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of VCDs is associated with a significantly shorter time to hemostasis and thus may shorten recovery. However, the use of VCDs is associated with a somewhat increased risk of infection, lower limb ischemia/arterial stenosis/device entrapment in the artery, and need of vascular surgery for arterial complications. Further studies are needed to get more conclusive results, particularly in patients at high risk of femoral puncture-related complications.

Can vascular closure devices reduce complications?

Vascular closure devices have demonstrated their ability to reduce hemostasis and ambulation times, as well as improve patient comfort, without increasing vascular complications in their initial industry-sponsored, randomized clinical trials. However, in the early years of first-generation closure devices, there was an initial concern about the risk of higher complication rates. As devices have improved, it appears that there may now be a trend towards reduced vascular complications compared with manual compression, especially in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions.

Vascular Closure Devices

This article summarizes the vascular closure device technologies that are available to physicians who perform percutaneous catheter-based procedures.