Adjunctive technique for the use of ProGlide vascular closure device to improve hemostasis

Safety and learning curve of percutaneous axillary artery access for complex endovascular aortic procedures

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous axillary artery access is increasingly used for large-bore access during interventional vascular and cardiac procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and learning curve of percutaneous axillary artery access in patients undergoing complex endovascular aortic repair (fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair [FBEVAR]) requiring large-bore upper extremity access and to discuss best practices for technique and complication management.

METHODS

One-hundred forty-six patients undergoing large-bore percutaneous axillary artery access during FBEVAR in a prospective, nonrandomized, Investigational Device Exemption study between September 2017 and January 2023 were analyzed. Ultrasound guidance and micropuncture were used to access the second portion of the axillary artery and 2 Perclose Proglide or Prostyle devices (Abbott Vascular) were predeployed before the insertion of the large-bore sheath. Completion angiography was performed in all patients to verify hemostatic closure. Axillary artery patency was also assessed on follow-up computed tomography angiography. Patient-related, procedural, and postoperative variables were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

One-hundred forty-five patients underwent successful percutaneous axillary artery access; 1 patient failed axillary access and alternative access was established. The left axillary artery was accessed in 115 patients (79%), and the right axillary artery was accessed in 30 patients (21%). The largest profile sheath was 14 F in 4 patients (2.8%), 12F in 133 patients (91.7%), and 8F in 8 patients (5.5%). Ten patients (6.9%) required covered stent placement (Viabahn, W. L. Gore & Associates) for failure to achieve hemostasis; there were no conversions to open surgical repair. Additional adverse events included transient upper extremity weakness in two patients (1.3%) and transient upper extremity paresthesias in two patients (1.3%). Three patients (2%) suffered postoperative strokes, including one unrelated hemorrhagic stroke and two possibly access-related embolic strokes. On follow-up, axillary artery patency was 100%. There was a trend toward decreased closure failure over time, with seven patients (10%) in the early cohort and three (4%) in the late cohort. There was a significant negative correlation between the cumulative complication rate and the cumulative experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Large-bore percutaneous axillary artery access provides safe upper extremity large-bore access during FBEVAR, achieving successful closure in >90% of patients with a low incidence of access-related complications. There was a trend toward better closure rates with increasing experience, suggesting a learning curve effect. Application of best practices including ultrasound guidance and angiography may ensure safe application of the technique of percutaneous large-bore axillary artery access.

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.

Clinical outcomes of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms that underwent endovascular repair in a district general hospital

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) in patients at a district general hospital.

METHODS

A retrospective clinical study was conducted using data on 16 patients with elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and nine patients with consecutive rAAA treated with EVAR from January 2010 to December 2014 in a district general hospital in Taiwan.

RESULTS

The preoperative characteristics of the two groups are listed. Thirty-six percent (9/25) of the patients were referred from other hospitals that did not offer surgical services. The percentage of patients with rAAA that were transferred from other hospitals was 55.5% (5/9). The stay durations in the intensive care unit for elective EVAR cases were shorter than those for emergent EVAR (1.75±1 d elective vs. 10±13.37 d emergent; P<0.019). The hospitalization days (11.06±4.07 d elective vs. 21.89±18.36 d emergent; P<0.031), operative time (183.63±57.24 min elective vs. 227.11±59.92 min emergent; P<0.009), and blood loss volumes (115.63±80.41 mL elective vs. 422.22±276.26 mL emergent; P<0.005) are shown; statistics for use of Perclose ProGlide(®) (7 cases elective vs. 0 case emergent; P<0.024) are compared. The overall 30-d mortality rate was 11.11% (1/9).

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm that EVAR surgery can be safely performed in a district general hospital with an integrated health care system. Using Perclose ProGlide(®) for selected cases may reduce blood loss and operative time.