谷歌浏览器插件
订阅小程序
在清言上使用

Clinical and Subclinical Femoral Vascular Complications after Deployment of two Different Vascular Closure Devices or Manual Compression in the Setting of Coronary Intervention.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES(2016)

引用 12|浏览9
暂无评分
摘要
BACKGROUND:In the past two decades vascular closure devices (VCD) have been increasingly utilized as an alternative to manual compression after percutaneous femoral artery access. However, there is a lack of data confirming a significant reduction of vascular complication in a routine interventional setting. Systematic assessment of puncture sites with ultrasound was hardly performed. METHODS:620 consecutive patients undergoing elective or urgent percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly allocated to either Angioseal (AS; n = 210), or Starclose (SC; n = 196) or manual compression (MC; n = 214). As an adjunct to clinical evaluation vascular ultrasonography was used to assess the safety of each hemostatic method in terms of major and minor vascular complications. The efficacy of VCDs was assessed by achievement of puncture site hemostasis. RESULTS:No major complications needing transfusion or vascular surgery were observed. Furthermore, the overall incidence of clinical and subclinical minor complications was similar among the three groups. There was no differences in the occurrence of pseudoaneurysmata (AS = 10; SC = 6; MC = 10), arteriovenous fistula (AS = 1; SC = 4; MC = 2) and large hematoma (AS = 11; SC = 10; MC = 14). The choice of access site treatment had no impact in the duration of hospital stay (AS = 6.7; SC = 7.4; MS = 6.4 days). CONCLUSIONS:In the setting of routine coronary intervention AS and SC provide a similar efficacy and safety as manual compression. Subclinical vascular injuries are rare and not related to VCD use.
更多
查看译文
关键词
vascular closure device, angioseal, starclose, randomized comparison
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要