Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing Manta device and Perclose device for closure of large bore arterial access

Data comparing MANTA device with Perclose device for large bore arterial access closure is limited. We performed meta-analysis to compare safety and efficacy of the two devices in large (⩾14 Fr sheath) arteriotomy closure post-TAVR. Relevant studies were identified via PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases until June, 2022. Data was analyzed using random effect model to calculate relative odds of VARC-2 defined access-site complications and short-term (in-hospital or 30-day) mortality. A total of 12 studies (2 RCT and 10 observational studies) comprising 2339 patients were included. The odds of major vascular complications (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.51-1.92; p = 0.98); life threatening and major bleeding (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.45-1.33; p = 0.35); minor vascular complications (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.63-2.99; p = 0.43); minor bleeding (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.57-1.56; p = 0.82); device failure (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.49-1.11; p = 0.14); hematoma formation (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.33-1.75; p = 0.52); dissection, stenosis, occlusion, or pseudoaneurysm (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.71-1.62; p = 0.73) and short-term mortality (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.55-1.84; p = 0.98) between both devices were similar. MANTA device has a similar efficacy and safety profile compared to Perclose device.

Suture-based vs. pure plug-based vascular closure devices for VA-ECMO decannulation-A retrospective observational study

Background

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a valuable treatment option for patients in cardiogenic shock, but complications during decannulation may worsen the overall outcome. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of suture-based to pure plug-based vascular closure devices for VA-ECMO decannulation.

Methods

In this retrospective study, the procedural outcome of 33 patients with suture-based Perclose ProGlide closure devices was compared to 38 patients with MANTA plug-based closure devices.

Results

Rate of technically correct placement of closure devices was 88% in the suture-based group and 97% in the plug-based group (p = 0.27). There was a significant reduction of severe bleeding events during VA-ECMO decannulation in plug-based versus suture-based systems (3% vs. 21%, p = 0.04). Ischemic complications occurred in 6% with suture-based and 5% with plug-based device (p = 1.00). Pseudoaneurysm formation was detected in 3% in both groups (p = 1.00). No switch to vascular surgery due to bleeding after decannulation was necessary in both groups.

Conclusion

Based on our retrospective analysis, we propose that plug-based vascular closure should be the preferred option for VA-ECMO decannulation. This hypothesis should be further tested in a randomized trial.