Kreutz Rolf P, Phookan Sujoy, Bahrami Hamid, Sinha Anjan K, Breall Jeffrey A, Revtyak George E, Ephrem Georges, Zenisek Joseph R, Frick Kyle A, Jaradat Ziad A, Abu Romeh Ibrahim S, O'Leary Brian A, Ansari Hamza Z, Ferguson Andrew D, Zawacki Kevin E, Hoque Mohammad Z, Iqtidar Ali F, Lambert Nathan D, von der Lohe Elisabeth
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine/Indiana University Health Methodist, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Division of Cardiology, Indiana University Health West, Avon, Indiana.
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2022 Jun 29;1(5):100370. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2022.100370. eCollection 2022 Sep-Oct.
Femoral arterial access remains widely used despite recent increase in radial access for cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Various femoral artery closure devices have been developed and are commonly used to shorten vascular closure times, with variable rates of vascular complications observed in clinical trials. We sought to examine the rates of contemporary outcomes during diagnostic catheterization and PCI with the most common femoral artery closure devices.
We identified patients who had undergone either diagnostic catheterization alone ( = 14,401) or PCI ( = 11,712) through femoral artery access in the Indiana University Health Multicenter Cardiac Cath registry. We compared outcomes according to closure type: manual compression, Angio-Seal, Perclose, or Mynx. Access complications and bleeding outcomes were measured according to National Cardiovascular Data Registry standard definitions.
The use of any vascular closure device as compared to manual femoral arterial access hold was associated with a significant reduction in vascular access complications and bleeding events in patients who underwent PCI. No significant difference in access-site complications was observed for diagnostic catheterization alone. Among closure devices, Perclose and Angio-Seal had a lower rate of hematoma than Mynx.
The use of femoral artery access closure devices is associated with a reduction in vascular access complication rates as compared to manual femoral artery compression in patients who undergo PCI.
尽管近年来用于心脏导管插入术和经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的桡动脉入路有所增加,但股动脉入路仍被广泛使用。已经开发出各种股动脉闭合装置,通常用于缩短血管闭合时间,在临床试验中观察到的血管并发症发生率各不相同。我们试图研究使用最常见的股动脉闭合装置进行诊断性导管插入术和PCI期间的当代结局发生率。
我们在印第安纳大学健康多中心心脏导管注册中心确定了通过股动脉入路单独进行诊断性导管插入术(n = 14401)或PCI(n = 11712)的患者。我们根据闭合类型比较结局:手动压迫、血管封堵器(Angio-Seal)、缝合器(Perclose)或明克斯封堵系统(Mynx)。根据国家心血管数据注册中心的标准定义测量血管入路并发症和出血结局。
与手动压迫股动脉入路相比,使用任何血管闭合装置均与接受PCI的患者血管入路并发症和出血事件显著减少相关。单独进行诊断性导管插入术时,未观察到血管入路部位并发症有显著差异。在闭合装置中,缝合器和血管封堵器的血肿发生率低于明克斯封堵系统。
与接受PCI的患者手动压迫股动脉相比,使用股动脉入路闭合装置可降低血管入路并发症发生率。