Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2020 Aug;96(2):442-447.
doi: 10.1002/ccd.28585. Epub 2019 Nov 12.

The utilization of single versus double Perclose devices for transfemoral aortic valve replacement access site closure: Insights from Cleveland Clinic Aortic Valve Center

Najdat Bazarbashi  1 , Keerat Ahuja  1 , Mohamed M Gad  1 , Yasser M Sammour  1 , Manpreet Kaur  1 , Antonette Karrthik  1 , Anas M Saad  1 , Shameer Khubber  1 , Kamalpreet Dhaliwal  1 , Stephanie L Mick  1 , Jose L Navia  1 , Rishi Puri  1 , Grant W Reed  1 , Amar Krishnaswamy  1 , Samir R Kapadia  1
Affiliations
Observational Study

The utilization of single versus double Perclose devices for transfemoral aortic valve replacement access site closure: Insights from Cleveland Clinic Aortic Valve Center

Najdat Bazarbashi et al. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Aug.

Abstract

Introduction: Percutaneous femoral access is the preferred access route for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The majority of experienced TAVR centers use two 6F Perclose ProGlide™ devices to close the primary vascular access site, deployed prior to upsizing sheath size with closure completed at the end of the case (the "preclose" approach). A strategy of utilizing a single Perclose device to preclose may have advantages including fewer complications, complexity, and cost, but the safety of this is unknown. This study examines in the safety and efficacy of using a single Perclose versus double Perclose for perclosure of large bore access during TAVR.

Methods: Patients undergoing Transfemoral (TF) TAVR from January 2014 to December 2017 within the Cleveland Clinic Aortic Valve Center were identified. A retrospective review of medical charts was conducted. Vascular complications were defined according to the VARC-2 criteria.

Results: A total of 740 patients were included; 487 (65.8%) received a single Perclose device while 253 (34.2%) received double Perclose devices. Baseline characteristics were similar with no differences between the single versus double Perclose groups, respectively. The access sheath size was similar in both groups with (14, 16, and 18 F) being the most common sizes utilized. Of the total 487 patients with single Perclose, 75.6% needed additional closure device (AngioSeal). With double Perclose strategy, additional closure device (AngioSeal) was used in 40.3% patients with 470 (63.5%) patients being successfully perclosed. Vascular complication rates including hematoma, stenosis requiring stenting, pseudoaneurysm, and other major vascular complications were similar between both groups.

Conclusion: Single 6F ProGlide use for preclosure is a safe strategy for TF TAVR using the S3 valve. Additional closure device was not needed in almost one-quarter of the patients. When necessary, residual bleeding can be controlled with the AngioSeal Device at the end of the procedure. This single device preclose strategy can help to reduce the cost of TAVR procedure without increasing risk.

Keywords: single closure device; transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement; vascular complications.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • A single stich is maybe enough.
    Stabile E, Esposito G. Stabile E, et al. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Aug;96(2):448-449. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29155. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020. PMID: 32797740

References

REFERENCES

    1. Mack MJ. Access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: which is the preferred route? JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5(5):487-488.
    1. Agarwal S, Tuzcu EM, Stewart W, Bajaj NS, Svensson LG, Kapadia SR. Comparison of multicenter registries and randomized control trials for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Indian Heart J. 2013;65(4):400-411.
    1. Barbanti M, Capranzano P, Ohno Y, et al. Comparison of suture-based vascular closure devices in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. EuroIntervention. 2015;11(6):690-697.
    1. Saleh N, De Palma R, Settergren M, Ruck A. Femoral access-related complications during percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation comparing single versus double Prostar XL device closure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86(7):1255-1261.
    1. Barbash IM, Barbanti M, Webb J, et al. Comparison of vascular closure devices for access site closure after transfemoral aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(47):3370-3379.

Publication types