Suture-based techniques versus manual compression for femoral venous haemostasis after electrophysiology procedures.
Catheter ablation
electrophysiology
femoral haemostasis
figure‐of‐eight suture
vascular complications
Journal
Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
ISSN: 1540-8167
Titre abrégé: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010756
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Sep 2024
04 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised:
05
08
2024
received:
18
07
2024
accepted:
12
08
2024
medline:
5
9
2024
pubmed:
5
9
2024
entrez:
5
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Methods for femoral venous haemostasis following electrophysiology (EP) procedures include manual compression (MC) and suture-based techniques such as a figure-of-eight suture secured with a hand-tied knot (Fo8 We studied consecutive patients undergoing EP procedures at our institution between March and December 2023. Patients were categorised into three haemostasis groups: MC, Fo8 1089 patients were included: MC 718 (65.9%); Fo8 Femoral haemostasis with Fo8
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
OBJECTIVE
Methods for femoral venous haemostasis following electrophysiology (EP) procedures include manual compression (MC) and suture-based techniques such as a figure-of-eight suture secured with a hand-tied knot (Fo8
METHODS
METHODS
We studied consecutive patients undergoing EP procedures at our institution between March and December 2023. Patients were categorised into three haemostasis groups: MC, Fo8
RESULTS
RESULTS
1089 patients were included: MC 718 (65.9%); Fo8
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Femoral haemostasis with Fo8
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Ding WY, Lip GYH, Bartoletti S, et al. Long‐term outcomes of left atrial appendage occlusion in high‐risk atrial fibrillation patients: 4‐year follow up data. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2021;51(4):1090‐1093. doi:10.1007/s11239-020-02333-y
Benali K, Khairy P, Hammache N, et al. Procedure‐Related complications of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023;81(21):2089‐2099. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2023.03.418
Eckardt L, Doldi F, Anwar O, et al. Major in‐hospital complications after catheter ablation of cardiac arrhythmias: individual case analysis of 43 031 procedures. Europace. 2023;26(1):euad361. doi:10.1093/europace/euad361
Bohnen M, Stevenson WG, Tedrow UB, et al. Incidence and predictors of major complications from contemporary catheter ablation to treat cardiac arrhythmias. Heart Rhythm. 2011;8(11):1661‐1666. doi:10.1016/j.hrthm.2011.05.017
Ding WY, Pearman CM, Bonnett L, et al. Complication rates following ventricular tachycardia ablation in ischaemic and non‐ischaemic cardiomyopathies: a systematic review. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2022;63(1):59‐67. doi:10.1007/s10840-021-00948-6
Bin Waleed K, Leung LW, Akhtar Z, et al New approaches to achieving hemostasis after venous access in cardiovascular patients. Kardiol Pol. 2022;80(7‐8):750‐759. doi:10.33963/KP.a2022.0148
Payne J, Aznaurov S, Gautam S. Three‐way stopcock suture technique for hemostasis after ablation for atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2018;29(12):1724‐1727. doi:10.1111/jce.13712
Yorgun H, Canpolat U, Ates AH, et al. Comparison of standard vs modified “figure‐of‐eight” suture to achieve femoral venous hemostasis after cryoballoon based atrial fibrillation ablation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2019;42(9):1175‐1182. doi:10.1111/pace.13764
Mujer MT, Al‐Abcha A, Flores J, Saleh Y, Robinson P. A comparison of figure‐of‐8‐suture versus manual compression for venous access closure after cardiac procedures: an updated meta‐analysis. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;43(8):856‐865. doi:10.1111/pace.14008
Issa ZF, Amr BS. Venous hemostasis postcatheter ablation of atrial fibrillation while under therapeutic levels of oral and intravenous anticoagulation. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2015;44(2):97‐104. doi:10.1007/s10840-015-0036-y
Aytemir K, Canpolat U, Yorgun H, et al. Usefulness of ‘figure‐of‐eight’ suture to achieve haemostasis after removal of 15‐French calibre femoral venous sheath in patients undergoing cryoablation. Europace. 2016;18(10):1545‐1550. doi:10.1093/europace/euv375
Lakshmanadoss U, Wong WS, Kutinsky I, et al. Figure‐of‐eight suture for venous hemostasis in fully anticoagulated patients after atrial fibrillation catheter ablation. Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J. 2017;17(5):134‐139. doi:10.1016/j.ipej.2017.02.003
Akkaya E, Berkowitsch A, Zaltsberg S, et al. Safety and feasibility of percutaneous skin closure using purse‐string suture compared with compression bandage after pulmonary vein isolation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2017;28(9):1048‐1057. doi:10.1111/jce.13271
Okada M, Inoue K, Tanaka K, et al. Efficacy and safety of figure‐of‐eight suture for hemostasis after radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Circ J. 2018;82(4):956‐964. doi:10.1253/circj.CJ-17-1213
Payne J, Bickel T, Gautam S. Figure‐of‐eight sutures for hemostasis result in shorter lab recovery time after ablation for atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2018;4:1017‐1021. doi:10.1111/pace.13405
Kumar V, Wish M, Venkataraman G, Bliden K, Jindal M, Strickberger A. A randomized comparison of manual pressure versus figure‐of‐eight suture for hemostasis after cryoballoon ablation for atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019;30(12):2806‐2810. doi:10.1111/jce.14252
Pracon R, Bangalore S, Henzel J, et al. A randomized comparison of modified subcutaneous “z”‐stitch versus manual compression to achieve hemostasis after large caliber femoral venous sheath removal. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;91(1):105‐112. doi:10.1002/ccd.27003
Jensen CJ, Schnur M, Lask S, et al. Feasibility of the Figure‐of‐8‐Suture as venous closure in interventional electrophysiology: one strategy for all? Int J Med Sci. 2020;17(7):965‐969. doi:10.7150/ijms.42593