MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.carrev.2017.08.009

Медицинская библиотека · Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions · 2017

Comparison of manual compression and vascular hemostasis devices after coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention through femoral artery access: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Dahal Khagendra, Rijal Jharendra, Shahukhal Ravi, Sharma Sharan, Watti Hussam, Azrin Michael, Katikaneni Pavan, Jimenez Enrique, Tandon Neeraj, Modi Kalgi, Lee Juyong

СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of manual compression (MC) with vascular hemostasis devices (VHD) in patients undergoing coronary angiography (CA) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) through femoral artery access.

INTRODUCTION

The use of femoral artery access for coronary procedures may result in access-related complications, prolonged immobility and discomfort for the patients. MC results in longer time-to-hemostasis (TTH) and time-to-ambulation (TTA) compared to VHDs but its role in access-related complications remains unclear in patients undergoing coronary procedures.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and relevant references for English language randomized controlled trials (RCT) from inception through September 30, 2016. We performed the meta-analysis using random effects model. The outcomes were time-to-hemostasis, time-to-ambulation, major bleeding, large hematoma >5cm, pseudoaneurysm and other adverse events.

RESULTS

The electronic database search resulted in a total of 44 RCTs with a total of 18,802 patients for analysis. MC, compared to VHD resulted in longer TTH [mean difference (MD): 11.21min; 95% confidence interval (CI) 8.13-14.29; P<0.00001] and TTA [standardized mean difference: 1.2 (0.79-1.62); P<0.00001] along with excess risk of hematoma >5cm formation [risk ratio (RR): 1.38 (1.15-1.67); P=0.0008]. MC resulted in similar risk of major bleeding [1.01 (0.64-1.60); P=0.95] pseudoaneurysm [0.99 (0.75-1.29); P=0.92], infections [0.52 (0.25-1.10); P=0.09], need of surgery [0.60 (0.29-1.22); P=0.16), AV fistula [0.93 (0.68-1.27); P=0.63] and ipsilateral leg ischemia [0.95 (0.57-1.60); P=0.86] compared to VHD.

CONCLUSION

Manual compression increase time-to-hemostasis, time-to-ambulation and risk of hematoma formation compared vascular hemostasis devices.

Для цитирования: Dahal Khagendra, Rijal Jharendra, Shahukhal Ravi, Sharma Sharan, Watti Hussam, Azrin Michael, Katikaneni Pavan, Jimenez Enrique, Tandon Neeraj, Modi Kalgi, Lee Juyong. Comparison of manual compression and vascular hemostasis devices after coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention through femoral artery access: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.. Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2017.08.009.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.