Safety and effectiveness of single ProGlide vascular access in patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair.
Aged
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal
/ diagnostic imaging
Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation
/ adverse effects
Catheterization, Peripheral
/ adverse effects
Endovascular Procedures
/ adverse effects
Female
Humans
Male
Patient Safety
Postoperative Hemorrhage
/ etiology
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Treatment Outcome
Vascular Access Devices
Aneurysm
EVAR
Minimally invasive
Percutaneous
ProGlide
Journal
Journal of vascular surgery
ISSN: 1097-6809
Titre abrégé: J Vasc Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8407742
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2020
12 2020
Historique:
received:
06
10
2019
accepted:
04
03
2020
pubmed:
11
4
2020
medline:
16
3
2021
entrez:
11
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of single ProGlide use per bilateral access site for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms. A retrospective cohort study was performed for all elective percutaneous EVARs from November 2015 to December 2017 at the QEII Health Sciences Centre (Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada). Exposure of interest was number of ProGlides used per access site, dichotomized into bilateral single ProGlide closure vs nonsingle ProGlide closure on at least one femoral arteriotomy. Outcomes included Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria. Groups were compared with Fisher exact test, analysis of variance, or Wilcoxon rank sum, as appropriate. Logistic regression was used to compare the effect of single ProGlide use on VARC-2 and BARC criteria. A total of 131 cases were included, of which 116 had bilateral single ProGlide use for access closure. Baseline characteristics including comorbidities and smoking status were compared between groups. Groups were similar for all characteristics except smoking status, with an increased proportion of former smokers in the nonsingle ProGlide group. There were 119 (90.8%) patients who had single ProGlide use on the right femoral artery and 121 (92.4%) on the left; 16 (12.2%) patients had ProGlide deployment issues. Median maximal right and left femoral sheath diameters were 16F (interquartile range [IQR], 16F-18F) and 14F (IQR, 14F-16F), respectively. Median length of stay was 1 day (IQR, 1-1 day). VARC-2 criteria occurred in 8 of 131 (6.11%) patients, 6 of 116 (5.17%) with bilateral single ProGlides and 2 of 15 (13.3%) with nonsingle ProGlides. BARC criteria occurred in 6 of 131 (4.58%) patients, 5 of 116 (4.31%) with bilateral single ProGlides and 1 of 15 (6.67%) with nonsingle ProGlides. Single ProGlide use was not associated with a difference in VARC-2 (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.94) or BARC (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-6.79) criteria. No patients developed pseudoaneurysms or required repeated intervention for bleeding. Single ProGlide use per vascular access site in patients undergoing EVAR is a safe and effective method for access closure with sheath diameters up to and including 16F.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32276013
pii: S0741-5214(20)30482-1
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.03.028
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Video-Audio Media
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1946-1951Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.