Antegrade common femoral artery closure device use is associated with decreased complications
- PMID: 32165058
- PMCID: PMC7718979
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.01.052
Antegrade common femoral artery closure device use is associated with decreased complications
Abstract
Objective: Antegrade femoral artery access is often used for ipsilateral infrainguinal peripheral vascular intervention. However, the use of closure devices (CD) for antegrade access (AA) is still considered outside the instructions for use for most devices. We hypothesized that CD use for antegrade femoral access would not be associated with an increased odds of access site complications.
Methods: The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried from 2010 to 2019 for infrainguinal peripheral vascular interventions performed via femoral AA. Patients who had a cutdown or multiple access sites were excluded. Cases were then stratified into whether a CD was used or not. Hierarchical multivariable logistic regressions controlling for hospital-level variation were used to examine the independent association between CD use and access site complications. A sensitivity analysis using coarsened exact matching was performed using factors different between treatment groups to reduce imbalance between the groups.
Results: Overall, 11,562 cases were identified and 5693 (49.2%) used a CD. Patients treated with a CD were less likely to be white (74.1% vs 75.2%), have coronary artery disease (29.7% vs 33.4%), use aspirin (68.7% vs 72.4%), and have heparin reversal with protamine (15.5% vs 25.6%; all P < .05). CD patients were more likely to be obese (31.6% vs 27.0%), have an elective operation (82.6% vs 80.1%), ultrasound-guided access (75.5% vs 60.6%), and a larger access sheath (6.0 ± 1.0 F vs 5.5 ± 1.0 F; P < .05 for all). CD cases were less likely to develop any access site hematoma (2.55% vs 3.53%; P < .01) or a hematoma requiring reintervention (0.63% vs 1.26%; P < .01) and had no difference in access site stenosis or occlusion (0.30% vs 0.22%; P = .47) compared with no CD. On multivariable analysis, CD cases had significantly decreased odds of developing any access site hematoma (odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-0.95) and a hematoma requiring intervention (odds ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.81). A sensitivity analysis after coarsened exact matching confirmed these findings.
Conclusions: In this nationally representative sample, CD use for AA was associated with a lower odds of hematoma in selected patients. Extending the instructions for use indications for CDs to include femoral AA may decrease the incidence of access site complications, patient exposure to reintervention, and costs to the health care system.
Keywords: Access site complications; Antegrade access; Closure devices; Femoral access.
Published by Elsevier Inc.
Conflict of interest statement
The editors and reviewers of this article have no relevant financial relationships to disclose per the JVS policy that requires reviewers to decline review of any manuscript for which they may have a conflict of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Closure device use for common femoral artery antegrade access is higher risk than retrograde access.Ann Vasc Surg. 2021 Oct;76:49-58. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2021.03.009. Epub 2021 Apr 7. Ann Vasc Surg. 2021. PMID: 33838236 Free PMC article.
-
Common femoral artery antegrade and retrograde approaches have similar access site complications.J Vasc Surg. 2019 Apr;69(4):1160-1166.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.06.226. Epub 2018 Dec 4. J Vasc Surg. 2019. PMID: 30527937
-
Arterial cutdown reduces complications after brachial access for peripheral vascular intervention.J Vasc Surg. 2016 Jul;64(1):149-54. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.02.019. Epub 2016 Mar 23. J Vasc Surg. 2016. PMID: 27021376
-
Safety and efficacy of Angio-Seal device for transfemoral neuroendovascular procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Interv Neuroradiol. 2021 Oct;27(5):703-711. doi: 10.1177/1591019921996100. Epub 2021 Feb 18. Interv Neuroradiol. 2021. PMID: 33601976 Free PMC article.
-
Access-Site Complications in Transfemoral Neuroendovascular Procedures: A Systematic Review of Incidence Rates and Management Strategies.Oper Neurosurg. 2020 Sep 15;19(4):353-363. doi: 10.1093/ons/opaa096. Oper Neurosurg. 2020. PMID: 32365203
Cited by
-
Closure device use for common femoral artery antegrade access is higher risk than retrograde access.Ann Vasc Surg. 2021 Oct;76:49-58. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2021.03.009. Epub 2021 Apr 7. Ann Vasc Surg. 2021. PMID: 33838236 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Bosiers M, Deloose K, Callaert J. Anterograde or retrograde arterial access for diabetic limb revascularization. Semin Vasc Surg 2018;31:76–80. - PubMed
-
- Smialkowski AO, Huilgol RL. Percutaneous endovascular repair of popliteal artery aneurysms. Ann Vasc Surg 2014;28: 1469–72. - PubMed
-
- Grenon SM, Reilly LM, Ramaiah VG. Technical endovascular highlights for crossing the difficult aortic bifurcation. J Vasc Surg 2011;54:893–6. - PubMed
-
- Narins CR. Access strategies for peripheral arterial intervention. Cardiol J 2009;16:88–97. - PubMed
-
- Li Y, Esmail A, Donas KP, Pitoulias G, Torsello G, Bisdas T, et al. Antegrade vs crossover femoral artery access in the endovascular treatment of isolated below-the-knee lesions in patients with critical limb ischemia. J Endovasc Ther 2017;24:331–6. - PubMed