Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026
[Outcomes of suture-mediated vascular closure device in the closure of left brachial artery access site after thoracic endovascular aortic repair].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Li Weihao, Zhang Xuemin, Li Wei, Zhang Tao, Zhang Xiaoming
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of the suture-mediated vascular closure device in the closure of the left brachial artery access site after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).
METHODS: Data from 91 patients receiving TEVAR with left brachial artery puncture from January 2021 to May 2023 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. In 27 cases whose brachial artery was over 5 mm, a suture-mediate vascular closure device (Perclose ProGlide, Abbott) was used to deal with the left brachial artery access, and in the other 64 cases with brachial artery < 5 mm, manual compression was used. The primary outcomes were the incidence of perioperative access-related complications and long-term outcomes.
RESULTS: In the suture-mediate device group, the access-site compression time was significantly reduced than that in the manual compression group (P < 0.001). The proportion of discomforts, such as numbness, pain, and swelling of the compression-related limbs was significantly lower than that in the compression-alone group (3.70% vs. 42.19%, P < 0.001). One case with brachial artery access-related complications occurred in the suture-mediate device group during hospitalization, which was acute brachial artery occlusion and required reinterventions. In the manual compression group, 4 cases of brachial artery puncture point complications occurred during hospitalization, including 3 cases of pure hematoma with conservative management and 1 case of pseudoaneurysm requiring reintervention. There was no significant difference in the incidence of early puncture point complications between the two groups (3.70% vs. 6.25%, P=0.625). During an average follow-up of (14±6) months, no access-related complications of the left brachial artery occurred.
CONCLUSION: It is effective to use the suture-mediated vascular closure in the left brachial artery access site after TEVAR, and the long-term effect is satisfactory. For patients with >5 mm brachial artery, it is reasonable to use suture-mediated vascular devices to deal with brachial artery access.
METHODS: Data from 91 patients receiving TEVAR with left brachial artery puncture from January 2021 to May 2023 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. In 27 cases whose brachial artery was over 5 mm, a suture-mediate vascular closure device (Perclose ProGlide, Abbott) was used to deal with the left brachial artery access, and in the other 64 cases with brachial artery < 5 mm, manual compression was used. The primary outcomes were the incidence of perioperative access-related complications and long-term outcomes.
RESULTS: In the suture-mediate device group, the access-site compression time was significantly reduced than that in the manual compression group (P < 0.001). The proportion of discomforts, such as numbness, pain, and swelling of the compression-related limbs was significantly lower than that in the compression-alone group (3.70% vs. 42.19%, P < 0.001). One case with brachial artery access-related complications occurred in the suture-mediate device group during hospitalization, which was acute brachial artery occlusion and required reinterventions. In the manual compression group, 4 cases of brachial artery puncture point complications occurred during hospitalization, including 3 cases of pure hematoma with conservative management and 1 case of pseudoaneurysm requiring reintervention. There was no significant difference in the incidence of early puncture point complications between the two groups (3.70% vs. 6.25%, P=0.625). During an average follow-up of (14±6) months, no access-related complications of the left brachial artery occurred.
CONCLUSION: It is effective to use the suture-mediated vascular closure in the left brachial artery access site after TEVAR, and the long-term effect is satisfactory. For patients with >5 mm brachial artery, it is reasonable to use suture-mediated vascular devices to deal with brachial artery access.