24h and 30 day outcome of Perclose Proglide suture mediated vascular closure device: An Indian experience

Costs, efficiency, and patient-reported outcomes associated with suture-mediated percutaneous closure for atrial fibrillation ablation: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the cost and efficiency of suture-mediated percutaneous closure (SMC) compared to manual compression (MC) after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. SMC has been demonstrated to be efficacious in reducing hemostasis and bedrest times after AF ablation. To date, randomized data comparing the direct and indirect cost between the two techniques have not been described.

METHODS

We conducted a 1:1 randomized trial comparing SMC to MC following AF ablation. The primary endpoints have been previously published. However, secondary endpoints pertinent to indirect cost including complication rates, hospital utilization (i.e., delays in discharge, additional patient encounters, nursing utilization), pain, patient reported outcomes, as well as the direct costs of care associated with AF ablation were collected. We also performed secondary analysis of the primary endpoint to evaluate for a learning curve, and subgroups analysis comparing efficacy across different numbers of access sites and compared to those in the MC group with a figure-of-eight suture (Fo8), that could potentially have impacted the relative efficiency of the procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 107 patients were randomized and included: 53 in the SMC group and 54 in MC. A learning curve was observed in the SMC group between the first and second half of the study group (p = 0.037), with no such difference in the MC group. After accounting for the number of access sites, time to hemostasis remained shorter in the SMC Group (p = 0.002). Compared to those in the Fo8 arm (n = 37), the time to hemostasis remained shorter in the SMC group (p = 0.001). Among those planned for same-day discharge, there were more delays in the MC group (31.5% vs. 11.3%, p = 0.0144). Rates of major and minor complications were similar between SMC and MC groups at discharge (p = 0.243) and 30 days (p = 1.00), as were nursing utilization, self-reported pain, and overall patient reported outcomes. The overall cost of care related to the procedure was similar between the MC and SMC groups ($56 533.65 [$45 699.47, $66 987.64] vs. $57 050.44 [$47 251.40, $66 426.34], p = 0.601).

CONCLUSION

SMC has been shown to decrease time to hemostasis and ambulation and facilitate earlier same-day discharge after AF ablation without an increase in direct or indirect costs.

Comparing Obtura Vascular Closure Device to Manual Compression for Achieving Hemostasis After Percutaneous Transfemoral Procedures: A Randomized Study

PURPOSE

This trial was designed and aimed to compare safety and efficacy of Obtura™ vascular closure device (VCD) to manual compression (MC) among patients undergoing transfemoral catheterization.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial of Obtura VCD against MC randomized patients in 1:1 (n=268; 134:134) ratio. Safety and efficacy were measured by primary endpoints (time to hemostasis [TTH] and deployment success) and secondary endpoints which included technical success, device-related adverse events, and time to ambulation (TTA).

RESULTS

The procedural access using right femoral artery was performed in 95.52% of patients in Obtura VCD versus 96.27% in standard MC method, whereas 2.99% of patients in each group underwent left femoral access. Bilateral access was performed in 1.49% (n=2) versus 0.75% (n=1) in Obtura VCD versus MC, respectively. Both the technical success and deployment success were 100%. Patients in Obtura VCD group had shorter TTH (3.26±3.39 vs 23.95±8.24 minutes; p<0.0001) and TTA (155.44±125.32 vs 723.84±197.98 minutes; p<0.0001) than MC group. No access site complications (re-bleeding, infection, arteriovenous fistula, and transient access site nerve injury) were noted at 2-week, 1-month, and 3-month follow-ups. There were 4 (3%) and 6 (4.5%) cases of hematoma, respectively, in Obtura VCD versus MC and 1 case (0.7%) of post-procedural arterial pseudoaneurysm each in both the groups which were successfully resolved and patients were discharged with no further complications. Further follow-up was without any adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy of Obtura™ VCD with a significantly short TTH and TTA compared to MC.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In patients undergoing cardiac catheterization, vascular closure devices (VCDs) can achieve hemostasis faster after successful implantation of the device with fewer complications such as bleeding and ambulation can be achieved faster. In terms of effectiveness, Obtura VCD was found to be better than manual compression in achieving early hemostasis and higher technical and deployment success was accomplished. Obtura VCD does not require enlargement of the route through the tissues, uses the same existing arterial sheath as its conduit, and does not cause patients' access sites to feel uncomfortable while it is being deployed.

The PIGTAIL paradigm for a fast and safe transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement is the preferred primary access route whenever possible. Despite advancements in expertise and delivery system profiles, complications associated with the primary femoral access still significantly affect procedural morbidity and outcomes. The current standard for accurate main access planning involves proper preprocedural evaluation guided by computed tomography. Several baseline clinical and anatomical features serve as predictors for the risk of vascular injury occurring during or after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. In this paper, we aimed at reviewing the most up-to-date knowledge of the topic for a safe transfemoral access approach according to a paradigm we have called "PIGTAIL."

Comparison of manual compression, Z-stitch, and suture-mediated vascular closure device techniques in dogs undergoing percutaneous transvenous intervention

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Manual compression has been standard of care for maintaining hemostasis after percutaneous endovascular intervention, but can be time-consuming and associated with vascular complications. Alternative closure methods include the figure-of-eight suture (Z-stitch) and vascular closure device (VCD) techniques. We hypothesized that compared to manual compression, Z-stitch and VCD would significantly reduce time-to-hemostasis after transvenous access, and the proportion of dogs with vascular patency would not differ significantly among treatments.

ANIMALS

Forty-six client-owned dogs undergoing percutaneous transvenous interventional procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Dogs with vessel diameter <5 mm were randomized to undergo manual compression or Z-stitch, while those with vessel diameter ≥5 mm were randomized to undergo manual compression, Z-stitch, or VCD. Time-to-hemostasis, bleeding scores, presence of vascular patency one day and two to three months post-procedure, and complications were recorded. Data are presented as median (95% confidence interval).

RESULTS

In all 46 dogs, the right external jugular vein was used. Time-to-hemostasis was significantly shorter in the Z-stitch (2.1 [1.8-2.9] minutes) compared to VCD (8.6 [6.1-11.8] minutes; P<0.001) and manual compression (10.0 [10.0-20.0] minutes; P<0.001) groups. Time-to-hemostasis was significantly shorter in the VCD vs. manual compression (P=0.027) group. Bleeding scores were significantly greater at 5 and 10 min (P<0.001 and 0.013, respectively) in manual compression, compared to Z-stitch group. There was no difference in the proportion of dogs with vascular patency between groups (P=0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Z-stitch and VCD are effective venous hemostasis methods after percutaneous transvenous intervention, with Z-stitch providing the most rapid time-to-hemostasis. Both Z-stitch and VCD techniques have low complication rates and effectively maintain vascular patency.

Analysis of Determinants for Suture-mediated Closure Device Failure During EVAR Procedures

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for elective and emergency infrarenal aortic pathologies is the primary approach for treatment nowadays. During such procedure, the suture-mediated closure device (SMCD) (Perclose ProGlideTM, Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA) is commonly used. This study aimed to identify potential contributors for SMCD failure in a patient cohort of elective and emergency EVAR.

METHODS

Archived medical records from patients who underwent EVAR for aortic pathologies in elective and emergency setting at the University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany were included. Patient's co-morbidities, access vessel morphologies and hemostasis-related blood parameters were evaluated on their association with SMCD failure applying different statistical methods.

RESULTS

A total of 71 patients (139 femoral accesses) was included. The mean age was 73.5 ± 8.4 years. Overall SMCD failure rate was 4.3%, 4.1% for elective and 5.9% for emergency cases, respectively. Total procedure time was longer for the SMCD failure group (323 ± 117.8 min vs 171 ± 43.7 min). The calcification status of the common femoral artery (CFA), the diameter of the aortic bifurcation, and dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) on the medication plan prior to the procedure were associated with SMCD failure. Univariate binary logistic regression analysis nominated several potentially relevant predictors for SMCD failure who underwent subsequent multivariable binary logistic regression analysis. Here, DAPT on the medication plan was identified as being promising in predicting SMCD failure (OR 30.5), while anterior plaque formation in the CFA maintained as only statistically relevant determinant (OR 44.9).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the CFA calcification status to be associated with SMCD failure. Although discontinued prior to endovascular treatment, DAPT was also found to be associated with SMCD failure. Our results may advocate to perform obligatory platelet testing prior to EVAR to maximize patient safety.

Preclosure of large bore venous access sites in patients undergoing transcatheter mitral replacement and repair

OBJECTIVE

We aim to report on the efficacy and safety of large bore venous access (LBVA) preclosure with Perclose™ (Abbott Vascular Devices) suture-mediated device use following transcatheter edge-to-edge (TEER) and replacement (TMVR).

BACKGROUND

Patients requiring TEER and TMVR require LBVA. Clinical outcome data on the use of suture-mediated devices for LBVA site closure are limited.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2019, 354 consecutive high-risk patients with mitral valvular heart disease underwent TEER (n = 287) with MitraClip and TMVR (n = 67) with Edwards Sapien Valves. Patients had LBVA with 24 or 16 French sheaths. All patients underwent preclosure of LBVA except for one that underwent manual hemostasis.

RESULTS

There were no closure device failures. None of the cases required surgical repair of the access site following venous preclosure. Two cases had large hematomas (>6 cm) following Perclose in each group. Six cases had small hematomas (<6 cm and >2 cm) with three in each group. There was one major bleeding using Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 definition (retroperitoneal bleed from arterial puncture) unrelated to the venous closure. Transfusion related to vascular access complication was required in five cases. There were two immediate acute deep venous thromboses postprocedure; one of which occurred after preclosure. There were no arteriovenous malformations, pseudoaneurysms, or access site infections reported following Perclose.

CONCLUSION

In this large sample size analysis, Proglide preclosure technique is a feasible and safe alternative approach to achieving hemostasis after removal of LBVA sheaths in patients undergoing TEER and TMVR. Randomized trials are needed to compare the different modalities of hemostasis.

Vascular Closure: the ABC's

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Vascular access and closure is a key part of endovascular procedures, and access site-related complications are an independent predictor of adverse procedural outcomes. The purpose of this review is to discuss the methods of vascular closure including manual compression, vascular closure devices (VCDs) for both arterial and venous arteriotomies, their mechanisms, and access site-related complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

Various VCDs have been approved over the last three decades. These devices have different mechanisms to achieve hemostasis and are generally categorized into active and passive approximators. Studies have largely found that they are non-inferior to manual compression. Uncomplicated vascular closure is pertinent to avoid adverse procedure-related outcomes. The emergence of VCDs has reduced time to hemostasis, facilitating early ambulation and discharge and reducing hospitalization cost with comparable complication rate to manual compression. Nonetheless, they should be used in favorable vascular anatomy and are not intended to reduce complications.

Mid-term follow-up of percutaneous access for standard and complex EVAR using the ProGlide device

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair is an established treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm which requires arterial access via the groin. Most centres perform percutaneous ultrasound-guided access into the common femoral artery for delivery of the stent graft. The profile of endovascular devices necessitates large sheath sizes, therefore formal closure of the arterial puncture site is required. Various percutaneous devices are available, with data lacking on efficacy and mid-term safety profile. We present outcomes from a single centre with the Perclose ProGlide™ (Abbott Vascular Devices, CA, USA) suture-mediated system, using the well described "pre-close" technique.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Data were collected from operative records and electronic medical records. Patients undergoing standard (EVAR) or complex (F/B-EVAR) aneurysm repair between March 2015 and September 2019 were included. Complications were recorded per-patient and per-groin procedure.

RESULTS

266 patients were included; 182 (68.4%) standard infrarenal EVAR, 84 (31.6%) F/B-EVAR. There were a total of 484 groin procedures performed. Intraoperative Perclose ProGlide™ success was 98.1% (per patient) or 99.0% (per groin procedure). 30-day groin complication rate was 6.1% (per patient) or 3.1% (per groin procedure). There were no pre- or peri-operative factors which predicted the occurrence of groin complications. The rate of groin complications was not related to sheath size.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data support the use of percutaneous access with a pre-close technique for a variety of endovascular aneurysm repair procedures with both large- and small-bore access. The Perclose ProGlide™ system provides excellent mid-term complication-free and reintervention-free outcomes for groin procedures.

Vascular Access for Large Bore Access

Recent advances in the field of interventional cardiology have allowed for more complex procedures to be performed percutaneously. Ability to obtain safe large bore vascular access is frequently the key factor to procedural success. Meticulous technique for successful vascular access incorporates the understanding of anatomic landmarks, ultrasound, fluoroscopy, and micropuncture. Adequate hemostasis at the end of the case can be achieved through careful use of commercially available vascular closure devices. Although access-related vascular complications are uncommon, early recognition is key to successful management. Arterial tortuosity and calcification can present a significant challenge to successful common femoral artery access.

Femoral artery access site closure with perclose suture mediated device in coronary interventions

Objective

To compare the outcome of suture mediated vascular closure device Perclose Proglide (PP) with manual compression (MC) following transfemoral access for coronary interventions (CI).

Methods

It is a retrospective, observational, single centre study from January 2018 to September 2019. Consecutive patients undergoing interventions through transfemoral access were divided into PP and MC groups. Those with less than 3 months follow up were excluded. Two groups were compared for baseline characteristics and various complications at 24 h and at 30 days.

Results

Out of 1743 patients studied, PP group included 1343 and MC group, 400 patients. Both groups were comparable in baseline characteristics, sheath size and use of antiplatelets and anticoagulation. PP group had significantly less minor bleeding (P = .01, CI 0.34–4.03) and hematoma (P = .0007, CI 0.95–5.10) at 24 h. At 30 days, minor bleeding (P < .0001, CI 0.97–4.25), hematoma (P = .0002, CI 1.05–4.93) and pseudo-aneurysm (P = .0095, CI 0.03–1.18) were also significantly less in PP group. Obesity (OR 3.5, CI 1.29–9.49) and hypertension (OR 2.41, CI 1.12–5.19) were associated with increased minor bleeding at 24 h. Device failure rate was 2.38%.

Conclusions

PP device is safe, effective and is associated with fewer complications than MC in CI. Device failure rate is low. Obesity and hypertension are associated with increased minor bleeding in both groups.

Comparison between PeRcutanEous and surgical femoral aCcess for endovascuLar aOrtic repair in patientS with typE III aortic Dissection (PRECLOSE Trial)

OBJECTIVES

Aortic dissections are cardiovascular events with high mortality and morbidity rates. Management might be either with medical or interventional approach. Recently, thoracic endovascular intervention (TEVAR) becomes the first treatment of choice because of its better results and lower rates of complications in patients with type III aortic dissections. The intervention might be performed via femoral artery either with percutaneous or with surgical approach. Because of large sheath insertion to femoral artery, Pre-close technique is described in literature. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the outcomes and safety of 'Pre-close technique' to surgical approach in patients with type III aortic dissections who underwent TEVAR with femoral access ≥22 F.

METHODS

A total of 96 patients whom had type III aortic dissection and was performed TEVAR were retrospectively included in the study. Fifty-six patients had TEVAR with percutaneous approach and these patients are named as P-TEVAR group, and 40 patients had TEVAR with surgical approach and these patients are named as S-TEVAR group. Pre- and post-procedural data with complications and procedural data during TEVAR were evaluated for both groups and compared in between.

RESULTS

The main finding was that there was no significant difference between S-TEVAR and P-TEVAR groups in terms of complications and technical success. Operating room time was significantly decreased in P-TEVAR group (P < 0.001). Overall success rate for femoral approach in patients with Pre-close technique was 94.6% and was 100% for surgical approach. P-TEVAR group had post-operative complications in three patients and S-TEVAR group had in four patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Total percutaneous approach with Pre-close technique using Pro-Glide device is a safe and feasible method of femoral access in patients with type III aortic dissections.

Large arteriotomies closure using a combination of vascular closure devices during TEVAR/EVAR: A single centre experience

In this case series, we share our experience of total percutaneous closure of large arteriotomies using combination of vascular closure devices (VCD). A total of six patients with seven sites for endovascular repair were taken for total percutaneous endovascular aortic repair. Ten femoral arteriotomies (26 French (F) = 2, 24 F = 1, 22 F = 3, 20 F = 1, 18 F = 1 &16 F = 2) were successfully closed with 26 Perclose™ and 07 Angio-seal™ devices. There were no local site complications or VCD failure in any of our patients.

Clinical efficacy and safety of the PRO-glide device as a sUture-mediated ClosurE in Thoracic EndoVascular Aortic Repair in patients with previous groin intervention (from the PRODUCE-TEVAR Trial)

BACKGROUND

While the percutaneous approach is increasingly preferred, suture-mediated closure devices have been put into clinical practice to close the femoral artery during procedures requiring a large-sized introducer. However, scar in the groin is considered a contraindication or an exclusion criterion for percutaneous procedures. The aim of our study was to investigate the outcomes and safety of Pro-Glide device as suture-mediated closure device in patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair with percutaneous femoral access ≥22 F who had previous groin intervention.

METHODS

A total of 73 patients who underwent endovascular repair with percutaneous femoral access were retrospectively included in the study. Previous groin intervention was defined as history of open surgical access or large sheath insertion (>18 F) to femoral artery because of endovascular or valvular intervention. Patients were divided into two groups as who had previous groin intervention PGI (+) and had not PGI (-).

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients [60 male (82.2%)] were included in the study. Seventeen patients had PGI, and 56 did not. When groups were compared in terms of sheath sizes, a significantly higher sheath sizes were used in PGI (+) patients (24.5 ± 1.1 F vs. 23.8 ± 0.9 F, p = 0.005). The overall success rate in the femoral approach with pre-close technique was statistically insignificant between two groups (94.1% vs. 96.4%, p = 0.55). One patient in PGI (+) group and two patients in PGI (-) had technical failure for percutaneous femoral approach. One patient (5.9%) in PGI (+) group and one patient (1.8%) in PGI (-) group had femoral complications after the procedures; however, there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of complications (5.9% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.13).

CONCLUSION

Pro-Glide device may be a safe and less invasive method for femoral access in patients with PGI and might not be considered as a contraindication for patients with history of PGI.

Safety and effectiveness of single ProGlide vascular access in patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of single ProGlide use per bilateral access site for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed for all elective percutaneous EVARs from November 2015 to December 2017 at the QEII Health Sciences Centre (Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada). Exposure of interest was number of ProGlides used per access site, dichotomized into bilateral single ProGlide closure vs nonsingle ProGlide closure on at least one femoral arteriotomy. Outcomes included Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria. Groups were compared with Fisher exact test, analysis of variance, or Wilcoxon rank sum, as appropriate. Logistic regression was used to compare the effect of single ProGlide use on VARC-2 and BARC criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 131 cases were included, of which 116 had bilateral single ProGlide use for access closure. Baseline characteristics including comorbidities and smoking status were compared between groups. Groups were similar for all characteristics except smoking status, with an increased proportion of former smokers in the nonsingle ProGlide group. There were 119 (90.8%) patients who had single ProGlide use on the right femoral artery and 121 (92.4%) on the left; 16 (12.2%) patients had ProGlide deployment issues. Median maximal right and left femoral sheath diameters were 16F (interquartile range [IQR], 16F-18F) and 14F (IQR, 14F-16F), respectively. Median length of stay was 1 day (IQR, 1-1 day). VARC-2 criteria occurred in 8 of 131 (6.11%) patients, 6 of 116 (5.17%) with bilateral single ProGlides and 2 of 15 (13.3%) with nonsingle ProGlides. BARC criteria occurred in 6 of 131 (4.58%) patients, 5 of 116 (4.31%) with bilateral single ProGlides and 1 of 15 (6.67%) with nonsingle ProGlides. Single ProGlide use was not associated with a difference in VARC-2 (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.94) or BARC (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-6.79) criteria. No patients developed pseudoaneurysms or required repeated intervention for bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Single ProGlide use per vascular access site in patients undergoing EVAR is a safe and effective method for access closure with sheath diameters up to and including 16F.

Prospective Evaluation of Factors Affecting the Safety and Efficacy of Perclose Proglide Vascular Closure Device in Neurovascular Interventions

Background

Most of the neurointerventional procedures use various anticoagulants, antiplatelets, and fibrinolytic drugs, and it can predispose arterial access site complications. Safe and efficient closure arteriotomy site has extreme importance in reducing the morbidity. Percutaneous vascular closure devices (VCDs) enable us to close the arteriotomy sites. In this prospective study, we evaluated the factors affecting the safety and efficacy of Perclose ProGlide VCD in neurovascular interventions.

Materials and Methods

In this prospective study, we have evaluated the safety and efficacy of 327 Perclose ProGlide devices deployed in 217 patients who underwent various neurointerventions in our institute from October 2014 to October 2016. Time to achieve hemostasis (TAH) was calculated for various groups and the statistical significance of mean values between groups was estimated.

Results

Out of the 327 Perclose ProGlide deployed, complication rate was 0.91% and the mean TAH was 77.14 s. Assessment of TAH mean value showed statistically significant prolongation of TAH in obesity and those with larger arterial sheaths. Age, sex, post-heparin ACT, peri-procedure medications, and type of diseases had no significant role in increasing TAH. The evaluation also showed the presence of a learning curve in using this device.

Conclusion

Perclose ProGlide VCD is safe and effective in closing the arteriotomy after neurointerventions. Obesity and larger arterial sheaths are independent factors prolonging the TAH. Learning curve associated with this device mildly increases the hemostatic time and device-related complications.