Comparison of MynxGrip vascular closure device and manual compression for closure after femoral access angiography: a randomized controlled trial: the closure devices used in every day practice study, CLOSE-UP III trial

比较MynxGrip血管闭合器与手动压迫法在股动脉造影术后血管闭合中的应用:一项随机对照试验:日常实践中使用的血管闭合器研究,CLOSE-UP III试验

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Complications related to femoral artery access for coronary angiography (CAG) is a safety concern. Vascular closure devices (VCDs) have been developed to reduce the rate of complications after femoral artery access. We compared the safety and efficacy of the MynxGrip VCD versus manual compression (MC) after femoral access CAG in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: The study was a randomized, single center, non-blinded, two-arm non-inferiority trial. The study was stopped prematurely because of low inclusion rate. RESULTS: We randomized 869 patients to closure with the MynxGrip VCD or MC and 865 entered analyses. The incidence of the primary endpoint of major adverse vascular events (MAVE) after 30 days was 1.2% in the MynxGrip group and 0% in the MC group (p = 0.06). The median time to hemostasis was 4 [3:5] minutes and 10 [7:11] minutes in the MynxGrip group and MC group, respectively (p < 0.0001). The corresponding median times to mobilization was 73 [65:87] minutes and 76 [70:88] minutes (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: MAVE was rare after closure of femoral arterial access by both the MynxGrip VCD and MC. We found a numerical difference in favour of MC but this did not reach statistical significance. Time to hemostasis was shorter in the MynxGrip group when compared to the MC group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the local medical ethics committee and registered at clinicaltrials.org (ClinicalTrials identifier: NCT02237430 11/09/2014).

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。