Efficacy and Safety of a Hemostatic Puncture Closure Device With Early Ambulation After Coronary Angiography

Vascular Closure Device: To Close or Not To Close?

“…One study comparing them, involved 304 patients (204 in the closure device arm and 102 in the compression arm), and showed that although the incidence of bleeding and vascular complications were higher in the device group, they did not approach statistical significance (9% vs 6%, p=0.397). Furthermore the time to haemostasis and discharge were shorter in the VCD group (p<0.0001) [3]. A similar finding was reported by a relatively more recent study, involving 401 patients, which noted a statistically significant reduction in the time to haemostasis and ambulation in the VCD group.…”

Arteriotomy Closure Devices for Cardiovascular Procedures

“…25 A more contemporary randomized study was conducted by Chevalier and colleagues, 26 who enrolled 612 moderate-to high-risk patients undergoing PCI and demonstrated faster hemostasis (5 versus 52 minutes, PϽ0.001) and reduced bed-rest time (438 versus 952 minutes; PϽ0.001) and complication rates (6% versus 18%, PϽ0.001) with AngioSeal. 26 Although these effects of Angio-Seal were confirmed by others, 27 some studies still favored mechanical compression with the FemoStop device (Radi Medical Systems, Inc, Wilmington, Mass) over Angio-Seal. 28 …”

Managing Risk of Complications at Femoral Vascular Access Sites in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

“…Hemostasis is usually obtained shortly after deployment, allowing the patient to get out of bed and ambulate faster. 14,15,[69][70][71][72] Vascular closure devices, when compared with the mechanical and antithrombotic therapies. 3,72 Appropriate selection of patients by the physician is important, and the device should be placed only after confirmation of the vascular anatomy and the absence of significant local peripheral arterial disease.…”