Safety and effectiveness of vascular closure devices in interventional radiological procedures
- PMID: 35538887
- PMCID: PMC10549703
- DOI: 10.1177/15910199221100628
Safety and effectiveness of vascular closure devices in interventional radiological procedures
Abstract
Background: Although it is well known that vascular closure devices (VCD) are commonly used in therapeutic interventional radiological procedures, standard use in diagnostic procedures is not as well studied.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the real-world safety and effectiveness of the VCD in both diagnostic and therapeutic interventional radiological procedures.
Materials and methods: A retrospective, single center study included all patients where VCDs were used for either a diagnostic or therapeutic interventional procedure. Various demographic and clinical risk factors were recorded and examined for any significant association with successful deployment and complications.
Results: A total of 2072 patients were included. VCDs were successfully deployed in 95.2% of the patients with 4.8% of perioperative complications, which included minor oozing from the puncture site, small hematoma less than or equal to 5 cm, large hematoma greater than 5 cm, pain, and loss of vascular access. Therapeutic (vascular interventional radiology (VIR) and neuro-interventional radiology (NIR)) procedures (OR 3.03, 95% CI 1.51-6.09, p = 0.002), use of Angioseal (OR 5.26, 95% CI 3.13-8.33), p < 0.001), and no use of antiplatelet medications (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22-0.97, p = 0.041) were independently associated with successful deployment of VCDs when controlled for other risk factors. Smoking (OR 3.50, 95% CI 2.00-6.05, p = <0.001), use of antiplatelet (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.04-3.87, p = 0.037) and use of heparin (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.10-2.86, p = 0.018) were independently associated with higher complication rates.
Conclusion: VCD's were successfully deployed in 95.2% of the patients with 4.8% of perioperative minor complications.
Keywords: Vascular closure device; complications; femoral access; femoral artery; interventional radiology.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Similar articles
-
FemoSeal® Device Use for Femoral Artery Closure by Different Techniques.Ann Vasc Surg. 2018 Aug;51:18-24. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2018.02.016. Epub 2018 Apr 18. Ann Vasc Surg. 2018. PMID: 29678650
-
AbsorbaSeal™ Vascular Closure Device: A Novel Device for Hemostasis Following Interventional Peripheral Vascular Procedures.Surg Technol Int. 2017 Oct 12;31:93-99. Surg Technol Int. 2017. PMID: 29020709
-
Retrospective evaluation of safety and effectiveness of the EXOSEAL vascular closure device for single vascular closure and closure after repeat puncture in diagnostic and interventional radiology: single-center experience.J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013 May;24(5):698-702. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2013.02.014. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013. PMID: 23622041
-
Outcomes with plug-based versus suture-based vascular closure device after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2023 Mar;101(4):817-827. doi: 10.1002/ccd.30597. Epub 2023 Feb 19. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2023. PMID: 36802100
-
Vascular Closure Devices versus Manual Compression in Cardiac Interventional Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cardiovasc Ther. 2022 Sep 9;2022:8569188. doi: 10.1155/2022/8569188. eCollection 2022. Cardiovasc Ther. 2022. PMID: 36134143 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Preclinical evaluation of vascular closure devices.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Nov 29;11:1502909. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1502909. eCollection 2024. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024. PMID: 39677036 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Advancements in Vascular Closure Devices for Effective Hemostasis in Femoral Artery Interventions.Med Sci Monit. 2024 Oct 23;30:e944884. doi: 10.12659/MSM.944884. Med Sci Monit. 2024. PMID: 39439111 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Noori VJ, Eldrup-Jørgensen J. A systematic review of vascular closure devices for femoral artery puncture sites. J Vasc Surg 2018; 68: 887–899. - PubMed
-
- Wong SC, Bachinsky W, Cambier P, et al. A randomized comparison of a novel bioabsorbable vascular closure device versus manual compression in the achievement of hemostasis after percutaneous femoral procedures. The ECLIPSE (Ensure’s Vascular Closure Device Speeds Hemostasis Trial). JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2009; 2: 785–793. - PubMed
-
- Aksoy M, Becquemin JP, Desgranges Pet al. et al. The safety and efficacy of angioseal in therapeutic endovascular interventions. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2006; 32: 90–93. - PubMed
-
- Heo YJ, Jeong HW, Baek JW, et al. Ultrasound evaluation of puncture sites after deployment of two different types of vascular closure devices: a prospective comparative study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2018; 41: 1654–1663. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous