The Journal of invasive cardiology · 2000
Effectiveness and complications of vascular access closure devices after interventional procedures.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Sesana M, Vaghetti M, Albiero R, Corvaja N, Martini G, Sivieri G, Colombo A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Vascular closure devices are designed to obtain a fast hemostasis of the vascular access site after diagnostic and interventional procedures. This result should be obtained with a low incidence of complications.
METHODS: A retrospective, non-randomized study was performed to evaluate the success rate and vascular complications associated with the use of two different vascular sealing devices [Angio-Seal (Daig Corporation, Minnetonka, Minnesota) and Prostar (Perclose, Inc., Redwood City, California)] after interventional procedures.
RESULTS: Eight-hundred and twenty-seven devices were used (245 Angio-Seal and 582 Prostar). Angio-Seal success rate was 92% with a 2.5% rate of vascular complications; Prostar success rate was 89% with a 3.4% rate of vascular complications. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified advanced age (p < 0.05) and lower weight (p < 0.05) as independent predictors of vascular complications associated with Angio-Seal use, while diabetes (p < 0.05) was found to be a predictor of vascular complications in the Prostar group. Abciximab use and larger sheath size were not associated with an increased probability of vascular complications.
CONCLUSION: Angio-Seal and Prostar obtain a fast vascular access hemostasis after interventional procedures, with a low incidence of major vascular complications.
METHODS: A retrospective, non-randomized study was performed to evaluate the success rate and vascular complications associated with the use of two different vascular sealing devices [Angio-Seal (Daig Corporation, Minnetonka, Minnesota) and Prostar (Perclose, Inc., Redwood City, California)] after interventional procedures.
RESULTS: Eight-hundred and twenty-seven devices were used (245 Angio-Seal and 582 Prostar). Angio-Seal success rate was 92% with a 2.5% rate of vascular complications; Prostar success rate was 89% with a 3.4% rate of vascular complications. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified advanced age (p < 0.05) and lower weight (p < 0.05) as independent predictors of vascular complications associated with Angio-Seal use, while diabetes (p < 0.05) was found to be a predictor of vascular complications in the Prostar group. Abciximab use and larger sheath size were not associated with an increased probability of vascular complications.
CONCLUSION: Angio-Seal and Prostar obtain a fast vascular access hemostasis after interventional procedures, with a low incidence of major vascular complications.