Back to Search
Start Over
The utilization of single versus double Perclose devices for transfemoral aortic valve replacement access site closure: Insights from Cleveland Clinic Aortic Valve Center
- Source :
- Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac AngiographyInterventionsREFERENCES. 96(2)
- Publication Year :
- 2019
-
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 ProGlideā¢ 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.
- Subjects :
- Aortic valve
Male
medicine.medical_specialty
Percutaneous
medicine.medical_treatment
Hemorrhage
Punctures
030204 cardiovascular system & hematology
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
03 medical and health sciences
Pseudoaneurysm
0302 clinical medicine
Hematoma
Valve replacement
Aortic valve replacement
Risk Factors
Catheterization, Peripheral
Medicine
Humans
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging
030212 general & internal medicine
Aged
Ohio
Retrospective Studies
Aged, 80 and over
business.industry
Hemostatic Techniques
General Medicine
Equipment Design
medicine.disease
Surgery
Femoral Artery
Stenosis
medicine.anatomical_structure
Treatment Outcome
Access site
Female
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
business
Vascular Closure Devices
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 1522726X
- Volume :
- 96
- Issue :
- 2
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac AngiographyInterventionsREFERENCES
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....3af24b7a45ccf7b496962f3e7472baf3