N. prodotti: 0
Totale ordine: € 0,00
Indexed/Abstracted in: BIOSIS Previews, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,632
Bruno FREITAS, Sabine STEINER, Yvonne BAUSBACK, Holger STAAB, Daniela BRANZAN, Ursula BANNING-EICHENSEER, Andrej SCHMIDT, Dierk SCHEINERT
Division of Interventional Angiology, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vascular closure devices(VCDs) in non-cardiac endovascular interventions.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients submitted to endovascular interventions, with deployment of 2327 vascular closure devices. Demographic, clinical/periprocedural, post-operative, complication and reintervention data were reviewed.
RESULTS: 2107 patients (1409(66.9%) men) were included. Perclose ProGlide®(Abbott Vascular, CA,USA) was employed 1683 times(72.3%), Angio- SealTM(St. Jude Medical Inc.,MN,USA) 463(19.9%) and 181(7.8%) Exoseal®(Cordis,NJ,USA). Patients were 70.4±11 years old. Vascular approaches were 1794 retrograde(77.1%) and 533 antegrade(22.9%), with sheath size ranging from 5- to 8-French. Overall success rate was 95.2% and did not significantly vary according to the device. Overall failure rate was 4.8%, with high puncture site, morbid obesity, previous total anticoagultion and severe calcification being related to worse efficiency results. Major complications occurred in 15 patients(0.6%). All patients were evaluated before discharge from the hospital, and were scheduled to return for ambulatory follow-up visits at 30 days postoperatively. Control duplex ultrasonography was performed on a regular basis, or within this period in case of clinical complain/signs.
CONCLUSIONS: Vascular closure devices proved to be safe and effective in this study. Additional prospective randomized studies are recommended.