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

Authors :
Anas M. Saad
Kamalpreet Dhaliwal
Keerat Rai Ahuja
Amar Krishnaswamy
Rishi Puri
Mohamed M. Gad
Manpreet Kaur
Yasser Sammour
Samir R. Kapadia
Antonette Karrthik
Grant W. Reed
Najdat Bazarbashi
Stephanie Mick
Shameer Khubber
Jose L. Navia
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.

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