Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지

Efficacy of Femoral Vascular Closure Devices in Patients Treated with Anticoagulant, Abciximab or Trombolytics during Percutaneous Endovascular Procedures

  • Kim, Ha-Young (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Choo, Sung-Wook (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Roh, Hong-Gee (Department of Radiology, Konkuk University Hospital, Konkun University School of Medicine) ;
  • Han, Heon (Department of Radiology, Kangwon National University Hospital, Kangwon National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Sam-Soo (Department of Radiology, Kangwon National University Hospital, Kangwon National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Ji-Yeon (Department of Radiology, Kangwon National University Hospital, Kangwon National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Yul-Ri (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Sung-Hoon (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Shin, Sung-Wook (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Kwang-Bo (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Do, Young-Soo (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Cho, Sung-Ki (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, In-Ho (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Sung-Mok (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Byun, Hong-Sik (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Jeon, Pyoung-Jeon (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
  • Published : 2006.03.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This study assessed the outcomes of using vascular closure devices following percutaneous transfemoral endovascular procedures in the patients who were treated with heparin, abciximab or thrombolytics (urokinase or t-PA) during the procedures. Materials and Methods: From March 28, 2003 to August 31,2004, we conducted a prospective and randomized study in which 1,676 cases of 1,180 patients were treated with one of the two different closure devices (the collagen plug device was Angio-Sea; the suture-mediated closure device was The Closer S) at the femoral access site after instituting percutaneous endovascular procedures. Among the 1,676 cases, 108 cases (the drug group) were treated with heparin only (n=94), thrombolytics only (n=10), heparin and thrombolytics (n=3), or abciximab and thrombolytics (n=1) during the procedures; 1,568 cases (the no-drug group) were treated without any medication. We compared the efficacy and complications between the two groups. Of the drug group, 42 cases underwent arterial closures with the collagen plug devices and 66 cases underwent arterial closures with the suture-mediated closure devices. We also compared the efficacy and complications between these two groups. Results: The immediate hemostasis rates were 92.9% (1,456/1,568) in the nodrug group and 91.7% (99/108) in the drug group. Early complications occurred in four cases of the drug group. These included two episodes of rebleeding with using the Closer S, which required manual compression for at least 10 minutes, and two episodes of minor oozing with using one Angio-Seal and one Closer S, which required two hours of additional bed rest. There was no late complication. So, the total success rates were 90.8% (1,423/1,568) in the no-drug group and 88.0% (95/108) in the drug group. These results were not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.34). In the drug group, the difference of the successful hemostasis rate between the collagen plug devices and the suture-mediated devices was also not statistically significant (92.9% vs. 84.8%, respectively; p=0.21). Conclusion: Arterial closure of the femoral access site with using vascular closure devices is both safe and effective, even in the patients who received heparin, abciximab or thrombolytics.

Keywords

References

  1. Kahn ZM, Kumar M, Hollander G, Frankel R. Safety and efficacy of the Perclose suture-mediated closure device after diagnostic and interventional catheterizations in a large consecutive population. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002;55:8-13 https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.10045
  2. Kent KC, McArdle CR, Kennedy B, Baim DS, Anninos E, Skillman JJ. A prospective study of the clinical outcome of femoral pseudoaneurysms and arteriovenous fistulas induced by arterial puncture. J Vasc Surg 1993;17:125-131; discussion 131- 123 https://doi.org/10.1067/mva.1993.41707
  3. Kresowik TF, Khoury MD, Miller BV, Winniford MD, Shamma AR, Sharp WJ, et al. A prospective study of the incidence and natural history of femoral vascular complications after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. J Vasc Surg 1991;13:328-333; discussion 333-325 https://doi.org/10.1067/mva.1991.25478
  4. Rickli H, Unterweger M, Sutsch G, Brunner-La Rocca HP, Sagmeister M, Ammann P, et al. Comparison of costs and safety of a suture-mediated closure device with conventional manual compression after coronary artery interventions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002;57:297-302 https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.10294
  5. Katzenschlager R, Ugurluoglu A, Ahmadi A, Hulsmann M, Koppensteiner R, Larch E, et al. Incidence of pseudoaneurysm after diagnostic and therapeutic angiography. Radiology 1995;195:463-466 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.195.2.7724767
  6. Gerckens U, Cattelaens N, Lampe EG, Grube E. Management of arterial puncture site after catheterization procedures: evaluating a suture-mediated closure device. Am J Cardiol 1999;83:1658-1663 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9149(99)00174-5
  7. Gerckens U, Cattelaens N, Muller R, Lampe EG, Grube E. Percutaneous suture of femoral artery access sites after diagnostic heart catheterization and or coronary intervention. Safety and effectiveness of a new arterial suture technic. Herz 1998;23:27-34 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03043009
  8. Baim DS, Knopf WD, Hinohara T, Schwarten DE, Schatz RA, Pinkerton CA, et al. Suture-mediated closure of the femoral access site after cardiac catheterization: results of the suture to ambulate aNd discharge (STAND I and STAND II) trials. Am J Cardiol 2000;85:864-869 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9149(99)00882-6
  9. Wetter DR, Rickli H, von Smekal A, Amann FW. Early sheath removal after coronary artery interventions with use of a suture-mediated closure device: clinical outcome and results of Doppler US evaluation. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2000;11:1033- 1037 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1051-0443(07)61334-7
  10. Koreny M, Riedmuller E, Nikfardjam M, Siostrzonek P, Mullner M. Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterization: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 2004;291:350-357 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.3.350
  11. Michalis LK, Rees MR, Patsouras D, Katsouras CS, Goudevenos J, Pappas S, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing the safety and efficacy of three commercially available closure devices (Angio-Seal, Vasoseal and Duett). Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2002;25:423-429 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-002-1942-9
  12. O'Sullivan GJ, Buckenham TM, Belli AM. The use of the angioseal haemostatic puncture closure device in high risk patients. Clin Radiol 1999;54:51-55 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-9260(99)91240-0
  13. Grollman JH Jr. Percutaneous arterial access closure: now do we have the be all and end all? not yet! Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2000;49:148-149 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-726X(200002)49:2<148::AID-CCD6>3.0.CO;2-W
  14. Assali AR, Sdringola S, Moustapha A, Ghani M, Salloum J, Schroth G, et al. Outcome of access site in patients treated with platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in the era of closure devices. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003;58:1-5 https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.10384
  15. Simon A, Bumgarner B, Clark K, Israel S, Bogart MA. Manual versus mechanical compression for femoral artery hemostasis after cardiac catheterization. Am J Crit Care 1998;7:308-313
  16. Bogart MA. Time to hemostasis: a comparison of manual versus mechanical compression of the femoral artery. Am J Crit Care 1995;4:149-156
  17. Colapinto RF, Harty PW. Femoral artery compression device for outpatient angiography. Radiology 1988;166:890-891 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.166.3.3340792
  18. Heintzen MP, Strauer BE. Peripheral arterial complications after heart catheterization. Herz 1998;23:4-20 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03043007
  19. Pache J, Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Gawaz M, Neumann FJ, Seyfarth M, et al. Clopidogrel therapy in patients undergoing coronary stenting: value of a high-loading-dose regimen. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002;55:436-441 https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.10092
  20. Resnic FS, Blake GJ, Ohno-Machado L, Selwyn AP, Popma JJ, Rogers C. Vascular closure devices and the risk of vascular complications after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients receiving glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors. Am J Cardiol 2001;88:493-496 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9149(01)01725-8
  21. Popma JJ, Satler LF, Pichard AD, Kent KM, Campbell A, Chuang YC, et al. Vascular complications after balloon and new device angioplasty. Circulation 1993;88:1569-1578 https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.88.4.1569
  22. Omoigui NA, Califf RM, Pieper K, Keeler G, O'Hanesian MA, Berdan LG, et al. Peripheral vascular complications in the Coronary Angioplasty Versus Excisional Atherectomy Trial (CAVEAT-I). J Am Coll Cardiol 1995;26:922-930 https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-1097(95)00263-4
  23. Lumsden AB, Miller JM, Kosinski AS, Allen RC, Dodson TF, Salam AA, et al. A prospective evaluation of surgically treated groin complications following percutaneous cardiac procedures. Am J Surg 1994;60:132-137
  24. Applegate RJ, Grabarczyk MA, Little WC, Craven T, Walkup M, Kahl FR, et al. Vascular closure devices in patients treated with anticoagulation and IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors during percutaneous revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:78- 83 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(02)01924-1
  25. Duffin DC, Muhlestein JB, Allisson SB, Horne BD, Fowles RE, Sorensen SG, et al. Femoral arterial puncture management after percutaneous coronary procedures: a comparison of clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between manual compression and two different vascular closure devices. J Invasive Cardiol 2001;13:354-362
  26. Sesana M, Vaghetti M, Albiero R, Corvaja N, Martini G, Sivieri G, et al. Effectiveness and complications of vascular access closure devices after interventional procedures. J Invasive Cardiol 2000;12:395-399
  27. Carey D, Martin JR, Moore CA, Valentine MC, Nygaard TW. Complications of femoral artery closure devices. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2001;52:3-7; discussion 8 https://doi.org/10.1002/1522-726X(200101)52:1<3::AID-CCD1002>3.0.CO;2-G