Real-world experience of suture-based closure devices: Insights from the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience

Dual ProGlide vs ProGlide and Angio-Seal for Femoral Access Hemostasis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Randomised Comparative Trial

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications increase morbidity and mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacements (TAVR), often related to failures in vascular closure devices (VCDs). We intended to compare the dual Perclose ProGlide (PP) strategy and the hybrid combination of PP and Angio-Seal (AS) for femoral access hemostasis after TAVR.

METHODS

A randomised controlled trial with 257 patients comparing dual PP with 1 PP and 1 AS (AS+PP) for vascular closure after transfemoral TAVR was conducted. The primary end point was the composite of TAVR access site-related vascular complications and life-threatening type 2/3 or 1 bleeding according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3. Secondary end points included additional VCD use and significant peripheral ischemia related to arteriotomy closure within 1 year. Modified VCD failure, defined as failure to achieve hemostasis within 5 minutes or requiring additional endovascular manoeuvres, was also recorded.

RESULTS

The AS+PP combination yielded lower rates of the primary end point (18.2% vs 29.8%; P = 0.0381), vascular complication (18.2% vs 29.8%; P = 0.0381), additional VCD use (0.8% vs 19.0%; P < 0.0001), and modified VCD failure (9.9% vs 33.1%; P < 0.0001) than the dual PP. Bleeding complication rates were similar between the 2 groups. Three-month follow-up vascular duplex tests showed similar common femoral artery (CFA) diameters and peak systolic velocities (PSVs) between the 2 groups, but those with additional intervention had higher PSVs and smaller CFA diameters than those without.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined PP+AS for large-bore femoral access hemostasis after TAVR promises to be more effective and safer than dual PP in terms of vascular complications. Moreover, additional intervention for vascular complications resulted in smaller CFA diameters.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05491070.

Assessing the Reproducibility of Research Based on the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Data

OBJECTIVE

This article aims to assess the reproducibility of Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) data-driven studies by analyzing the data queries used in their research processes.

METHODS

Studies using MAUDE data were sourced from PubMed by searching for "MAUDE" or "Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience" in titles or abstracts. We manually chose articles with executable queries. The reproducibility of each query was assessed by replicating it in the MAUDE Application Programming Interface. The reproducibility of a query is determined by a reproducibility coefficient that ranges from 0.95 to 1.05. This coefficient is calculated by comparing the number of medical device reports (MDRs) returned by the reproduced queries to the number of reported MDRs in the original studies. We also computed the reproducibility ratio, which is the fraction of reproducible queries in subgroups divided by the query complexity, the device category, and the presence of a data processing flow.

RESULTS

As of August 8, 2022, we identified 523 articles from which 336 contained queries, and 60 of these were executable. Among these, 14 queries were reproducible. Queries using a single field like product code, product class, or brand name showed higher reproducibility (50%, 33.3%, 31.3%) compared with other fields (8.3%, P = 0.037). Single-category device queries exhibited a higher reproducibility ratio than multicategory ones, but without statistical significance (27.1% versus 8.3%, P = 0.321). Studies including a data processing flow had a higher reproducibility ratio than those without, although this difference was not statistically significant (42.9% versus 17.4%, P = 0.107).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that the reproducibility of queries in MAUDE data-driven studies is limited. Enhancing this requires the development of more effective MAUDE data query strategies and improved application programming interfaces.

Suture-Based Vascular Closure Versus Surgical Closure of Large Bore Arteriotomies: A Real-World Experience

INTRODUCTION

With the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (TEVAR), and frequent use of left ventricular assist devices in complicated percutaneous coronary interventions, the use of large bore arterial access has become a necessity. In the index study, we compared the percutaneous closure of large arteriotomies with open surgical (OS) closure.

METHODS

It was a prospective study in which we compared the technical success and vascular complication rate associated with the use of a suture-based vascular closure device (VCD): Perclose ProGlide (PP) with that of OS closure. The study was carried out at Command Hospital Air Force, Bengaluru, India, from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020. The inclusion criteria were any percutaneous intervention involving large bore arterial access (≥12 French (F) sheath). The exclusion criteria were any condition where a persistent need for vascular access at the end of the procedure was required. We noted the baseline characteristics and type of anesthesia for all patients. The primary outcome was technical success and major vascular complications, which included major local site bleeding: Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or more, failed hemostasis requiring a second intervention, and acute vessel occlusion. Total time taken for the procedure (TTP), time to ambulation (TTA), and time to discharge post-procedure (TTD) were noted for each patient. The secondary outcomes were any bleeding other than major, local hematoma sized >5 cm at 24 hours, pseudo aneurysm formation at 30 days, and acute limb ischemia at 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients (PP: 60 (males: 54, females: 6), OS: 60 (males: 50, females: 10)) were included in this study. The mean age of patients was comparable in both groups (PP: 71.8 ± 9.62 years and OS: 71.0 ± 7.76 years, p-value: 0.63). Total large arteriotomies (mean size: 18.03F ± 3.34) closed were 184 (PP: 90, OS: 94). The procedures performed were EVAR: 64 (PP: 30, OS: 34), TAVI: 38 (PP: 21, OS: 17), and TEVAR: 18 (PP: 9, OS: 9). All patients in PP group received dual ProGlide with preclose technique. All TEVAR procedures (total arteriotomies: 18) required a vascular sheath of ≥ 24F. There was no statistical difference between the mean size of sheaths used in the two groups. The technical success (PP: 95.55%, OS: 97.87%, 95% CI: -5.78%-10.98%, p-value: 0.48) and rate of major complications were similar in both groups. Three patients in the PP group who had failed hemostasis with two ProGlides were successfully managed with one additional Angioseal (6F) each. The occurrence of hematoma sized larger than 5 cm was significantly more in the PP group compared to the OS group (PP: 7 (7.78%), OS: 0 (0%), p-value: 0.006). While GA was used for all patients who underwent vascular closure with OS, only eight patients (13.33%) in the PP group required GA. The TTP, TTA, and TTD were significantly lower in the PP group as compared to the OS group.

CONCLUSION

The percutaneous closure of large bore arteriotomies with suture-based VCDs is equally effective and is not associated with increased major vascular complications. In fact, the TTP, TTA, and TTD are significantly lower in the PP group which can translate to better patient comfort and lower costs.

Cutting balloon for femoral arterial and venus obstructions due to suture-based closure devices: Case series

Suture-based vascular closure devices have been shown to be effective in hemostasis for procedures with vascular access. However, iatrogenic vascular occlusion may occur. The cutting balloon (CB) is a noncompliant balloon wrapped with 3-4 microsurgical blades that are intended to modify vascular lesions, but it may also be utilized to cut and release endovascular sutures. We report two cases in which the CB was employed as a bailout strategy to alleviate suture-related vascular occlusion after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The CB can be effectively utilized to resolve suture-related vascular occlusion.

Outcomes with plug-based versus suture-based vascular closure device after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing plug-based (i.e., MANTA) with suture-based (i.e., ProStar XL and ProGlide) vascular closure devices (VCDs) for large-bore access closure after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have yielded mixed results.

AIMS

To examine the comparative safety and efficacy of both types of VCDs among TAVR recipients.

METHODS

An electronic database search was performed through March 2022 for studies comparing access-site related vascular complications with plug-based versus suture-based VCDs for large-bore access site closure after transfemoral (TF) TAVR.

RESULTS

Ten studies (2 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 8 observational studies) with 3113 patients (MANTA = 1358, ProGlide/ProStar XL = 1755) were included. There was no difference between plug-based and suture-based VCD in the incidence of access-site major vascular complications (3.1% vs. 3.3%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-1.53). The incidence of VCD failure was lower in plug-based VCD (5.2% vs. 7.1%, OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.44-0.91). There was a trend toward a higher incidence of unplanned vascular intervention in plug-based VCD (8.2% vs. 5.9%, OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 0.97-1.89). Length of stay was shorter with MANTA. Subgroup analyses suggested significant interaction based on study designs such that there was higher incidence of access-site vascular complications and bleeding events with plug-based versus suture-based VCD among RCTs.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing TF-TAVR, large-bore access site closure with plug-based VCD was associated with a similar safety profile as suture-based VCD. However, subgroup analysis showed that plug-based VCD was associated with higher incidence of vascular and bleeding complications in RCTs.

Large-bore arterial access closure after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Aims

As the indications to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) expand to patients at increasingly lower risk, procedure-related vascular and bleeding complications events must be minimized. We aimed to evaluate the impact of different large-bore arterial access closure devices on clinical outcomes after TAVR.

Methods and results

We searched for papers that reported outcomes according to the type of vascular closure device/technique used after TAVR and performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). Fifteen studies involving 9259 patients who underwent access site closure using PROSTAR™ XL percutaneous vascular surgical system (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA), Perclose ProGlide™ suture-mediated closure system (Abbott), or MANTA^TM vascular closure device (Teleflex, Morrisville, NC, USA) were included. NMA showed MANTA to have the highest likelihood of reducing a primary composite endpoint of intra-hospital death, major vascular complications, and major or life-threatening bleedings [surface under the cumulative ranking curve analysis (SUCRA) 94.8%], but this was mitigated when only randomized clinical trials and propensity-matched cohorts were included (SUCRA 56.1%). The ProGlide showed the highest likelihood to reduce major or life-threatening bleedings, especially with increasing procedural complexity, and the MANTA device to reduce major and minor vascular complications. The ProStar XL device performed poorly in all explored endpoints.

Conclusion

Available evidence summarized through a NMA shows that ProGlide and MANTA devices appear to be both valid vascular closure devices globally and to be the best options to minimize vascular complications and reduce bleeding in patients undergoing TAVR, respectively.