Contemporary Use and Outcomes of Arterial Closure Devices After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program

Procedural Characteristics and Outcomes of Transcatheter Interventions for Aortic Coarctation: A Report From the IMPACT Registry

Background

Although surgical repair was the traditional first-line treatment for native coarctation of the aorta (CoA), balloon angioplasty (BA) and stenting are now increasingly being performed. We aimed to determine the practice patterns and acute outcomes of transcatheter interventions for native coarctation in the largest multicenter registry for congenital catheterization.

Methods

CoA interventions from the IMPACT (IMproving Pediatric and Adult Congenital Treatment) National Cardiovascular Data Registry were analyzed. The procedure choice and acute outcomes were compared among patients with no prior interventions on the aortic isthmus (native CoA). Procedural success was defined as no major adverse events (MAEs) and a final peak gradient of <20 mm Hg and optimal outcome as no MAEs and a final gradient of <10 mm Hg.

Results

Over the 8-year study period, 5928 CoA procedures were performed, of which 1187 were performed in patients with native CoA. In this group, stenting was performed in more then half of children aged >1 year and >90% of those aged >8 years. Procedural success was achieved in >90% of stenting procedures but in only 69% of BAs. Stent implantation was associated with a higher likelihood of optimal gradient (<10 mm Hg) after adjustment for age and baseline characteristics. MAEs were most common in children aged <1 year (14%), occurred in 2% to 2.5% of those aged 1 to 18 years and in 6.6% of adults (P < .001), and were more likely after BA than after stenting (odds ratio, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.28-0.9; unadjusted P = .02).

Conclusions

Catheter interventions for native coarctation are performed safely in older children and adults, with a high degree of immediate procedural success, particularly with stenting.

Contemporary Use and Outcomes of Arterial Closure Devices After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program

Background

Arterial closure devices reduce the length of bedrest after invasive cardiac procedures via the femoral approach, but there are conflicting data on their association with major bleeding and vascular complications. We thus sought to evaluate the contemporary use of femoral arterial closure devices and their association with major bleeding among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Methods and Results

We identified patients undergoing percutaneous intervention via the femoral approach within the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System from December 2004 through September 2018. The association between arterial closure device use and major bleeding was evaluated using both propensity matching and instrumental variable analyses, incorporating contrast‐induced nephropathy as a falsification end point. We identified 132 373 percutaneous coronary interventions performed by 681 operators, with closure device use increasing 1.2% each year (linear trend P<0.001). In a propensity‐matched cohort, closure devices were associated with a 1.1% reduction in periprocedural bleeding (95% CI, −1.5% to −0.6%). Closure devices were also associated with a numerical decrease in contrast‐inducted nephropathy that did not reach statistical significance (−0.6%; 95% CI, −1.3% to 0.1%). In an instrumental variable analysis of closure device use, there was no difference in the bleeding rate between those who received a closure device and those who did not (0.2%; 95% CI, −0.9% to 1.2%).

Conclusions

Arterial closure devices are associated with a reduction in major bleeding within a propensity‐matched cohort. This association dissipates in an instrumental variable analysis, highlighting some of the methodologic limitations of comparative effectiveness research in observational analyses.