MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.09.052

Медицинская библиотека · JACC. Cardiovascular interventions · 2020

Suture- or Plug-Based Large-Bore Arteriotomy Closure: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

van Wiechen Maarten P, Tchétché Didier, Ooms Joris F, Hokken Thijmen W, Kroon Herbert, Ziviello Francesca, Ghattas Angie, Siddiqui Saifullah, Laperche Clémence, Spitzer Ernest, Daemen Joost, de Jaegere Peter P, Dumonteil Nicolas, Van Mieghem Nicolas M

СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеEquivalence TrialПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to test the superiority in terms of efficacy and safety of a dedicated plug-based vascular closure device (VCD) during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) over a suture-based VCD.

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications after TAVR are relevant and often associated with VCD failure.

METHODS

The MASH (MANTA vs. Suture-based vascular closure after transcatHeter aortic valve replacement) trial is an international, 2-center pilot randomized controlled trial comparing the MANTA VCD (Teleflex, Wayne, Pennsylvania) versus 2 ProGlides (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, Illinois). The primary composite endpoint consisted of access site-related major or minor vascular complications at 30-days' follow-up. Secondary endpoints included clinically relevant access site bleeding, time to hemostasis, and modified VCD failure (defined as failure to achieve hemostasis within 5 min or requiring additional endovascular maneuvers such as endovascular stenting, surgical techniques, or additional closure devices). Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee according to the VARC-2 definitions.

RESULTS

A total of 210 TAVR patients were included between October 2018 and January 2020. Median age was 81 years, 54% were male, and the median STS score was 2.7%. There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of access site-related vascular complications between MANTA and ProGlide (10% vs. 4%; p = 0.16). Clinically significant access site bleedings were similar with both closure techniques (9% vs. 6%; p = 0.57). Modified VCD failure occurred less frequently in MANTA versus ProGlide (20% vs. 40%; p < 0.01). Suture-based closure required more often additional closure devices, whereas MANTA numerically needed more covered stents and surgical bailouts.

CONCLUSIONS

Plug-based large-bore arteriotomy closure was not superior to suture-based closure. Plug-based closure required fewer, but a different kind of bailout maneuvers.

Для цитирования: van Wiechen Maarten P, Tchétché Didier, Ooms Joris F, Hokken Thijmen W, Kroon Herbert, Ziviello Francesca, Ghattas Angie, Siddiqui Saifullah, Laperche Clémence, Spitzer Ernest, Daemen Joost, de Jaegere Peter P, Dumonteil Nicolas, Van Mieghem Nicolas M. Suture- or Plug-Based Large-Bore Arteriotomy Closure: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.. JACC. Cardiovascular interventions. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.09.052.

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.