Effectiveness and Safety of Different Vascular Closure Devices: Multicentre Prospective Observational study

不同血管闭合装置的有效性和安全性:多中心前瞻性观察研究

阅读:1

Abstract

AIM: The aim of this prospective, multicentre, observational study was to compare the efficacy and safety of balloon-based and non-balloon-based vascular closure devices (VCDs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 2021 to May 2022, 2373 participants from 10 different centres were enrolled. Among them, 1672 patients with 5-7 Fr accesses were selected. Successful haemostasis, failure and safety were evaluated. Successful haemostasis was defined as the possibility to obtain complete haemostasis with the use of VCDs, without any complication. Failure management was defined as the need of manual compression. Safety was defined as the rate of complications. Cases of haematomas/pseudoaneurysms (PSA) and artero-venous fistula (AVF) were collected. RESULTS: VCDs mechanism of action is statistically significant associated with the outcome. Non-balloon-based VCDs demonstrated a statistically significant better outcome: successful haemostasis was obtained in 96.5% vs. 85.9%, of cases when compared to balloon occluders (p < 0.001). The incidence of AVF was statistically more frequent using non-balloon occluders devices (1.57% vs 0%, p: 0.007). No significant statistical difference was found in comparing haematoma and PSA occurrence. Thrombocytopenia, coagulation deficit, BMI, diabetes mellitus and anti-coagulation were demonstrated to be independent predictors of failure management. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests a better outcome with the same complication rate, except that for AVF incidence for non-balloon collagen plug device if compared to balloon occluders vascular closure devices.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。