Use of the MANTA device to rescue failed pre-closure following transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation

'Post-Close' Femoral Arterial Haemostasis at Endovascular Aneurysm Repair using a Dedicated Large-Bore Vascular Closure Device: A Prospective Real-World Audit

PURPOSE

Percutaneous access for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is commonplace, with its attendant benefits. The combination of continued reduction in device profile and evolution of vascular closure device (VCD) design drives successful and safe percutaneous EVAR. A new such VCD is the MANTA Large-Bore Closure Device designed in two iterations for closure of arterial defects from 10 to 25F. We present a prospective audit of 131 large-bore femoral closures using an 'all-comers' approach to device selection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and thirty-one large-bore femoral arterial defects were analysed. Both 14F and 18F MANTA VCDs were deployed in this series as per instructions for use. Primary objectives were technical success, particularly successful deployment, and haemostasis achieved. Failures were denoted as failure to deploy; failure to achieve haemostasis was denoted as active bleeding, haematoma, or pseudoaneurysm formation requiring intervention. Later complications assessed were vessel occlusion/thrombosis or stenosis.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients (65 males and 11 females, age 75.2 ± 8.7 years) underwent a range of procedures including EVAR (n = 66), TEVAR (n = 2), and reinterventions (n = 8) requiring large-bore percutaneous femoral arterial access in 131 groins. Of these, the 14F MANTA VCD was used in 61 closures (defects ranging from 12 to 18F) and the 18F in 70 closures (defects ranging from 16 to 24F). Deployments achieved successful haemostasis in 120 (91.6%), and failures occurred in 11(8.4%) groins.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that a post-close approach using the novel MANTA Large-Bore Closure Device can be undertaken successfully to close a range of large-bore femoral arterial defects at EVAR/TEVAR with an acceptable rate of complications.

Comparison of plug-based versus suture-based vascular closure for large-bore arterial access: a collaborative meta-analysis of observational and randomized studies

BACKGROUND

Large-bore arteriotomies can be percutaneously closed with suture-based or plug-based vascular closure device (VCD) strategies. The efficacy of both techniques remains controversial.

AIMS

We conducted a meta-analysis of comparative studies between both VCD strategies, focusing on the most commonly applied VCDs (MANTA and ProGlide).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google scholar for observational studies (OS) and randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing vascular closure with the MANTA-based and the ProGlide-based technique. The principal endpoint of this analysis was access-site related vascular complications. Both study types were analyzed separately.

RESULTS

Access-site related vascular complications were less frequent after vascular closure with the MANTA technique in the analysis of OS (RR 0.61 [95%CI 0.43-0.89], p = 0.01, I² = 0%), but more frequent in the analysis of RCT data (RR 1.70 [95%CI 1.16-2.51], p = 0.01, I² = 0%). Both data sets provided no significant difference between the VCD techniques in terms of overall bleeding events (OS: RR 0.57 [95%CI 0.32-1.02], p = 0.06, I² = 70%; and RCT: RR 1.37 [95%CI 0.82-2.28], p = 0.23, I² = 30%). RCT data showed that endovascular stenting or vascular surgery due to VCD failure occurred more often after MANTA application (RR 3.53 [95%CI 1.07-11.33], p = 0.04, I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

While OS point to favorable outcomes for large-bore vascular closure with the MANTA-based technique, RCT data show that this strategy is associated with more access-site related vascular complications as well as endovascular stenting or vascular surgery due to device failure compared with the ProGlide-based technique.