Abstract

The safety of vascular closure devices (VCDs) is still debated. The emergence of more related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and newer VCDs makes it necessary to further evaluate the safety of VCDs. Relevant RCTs were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials electronic databases updated in December 2014. Traditional and network meta-analyses were conducted to evaluate the rate of combined adverse vascular events (CAVEs) and haematomas by calculating the risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Forty RCTs including 16868 patients were included. Traditional meta-analysis demonstrated that there was no significant difference in the rate of CAVEs between all the VCDs and manual compression (MC). Subgroup analysis showed that FemoSeal and VCDs reported after the year 2005 reduced CAVEs. Moreover, the use of VCDs reduced the risk of haematomas compared with MC. Network meta-analysis showed that AngioSeal, which might be the best VCD among all the included VCDs, was associated with reduced rates of both CAVE and haematomas compared with MC. In conclusion, the use of VCDs is associated with a decreased risk of haematomas, and FemoSeal and AngioSeal appears to be better than MC for reducing the rate of CAVEs.

Highlights

  • Manual compression (MC) is traditionally used to achieve haemostasis after coronary and peripheral angiography or angioplasty via the femoral artery

  • Our results showed that the risk for combined adverse vascular events (CAVEs) was similar between all the included vascular closure devices (VCDs) and manual compression (MC)

  • The results of meta-analysis of the trials published in the past decade revealed that the use of VCDs reduced the rate of CAVEs

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Manual compression (MC) is traditionally used to achieve haemostasis after coronary and peripheral angiography or angioplasty via the femoral artery. From the early 1990s, a variety of vascular closure devices (VCDs) have been developed to shorten the time-to-haemostasis and the time-to-ambulation[1,2]. These VCDs are mainly categorized into three different categories based on their mechanism of action, namely collagen plug-based VCDs, clips-based VCDs and suture -based VCDs. These VCDs are mainly categorized into three different categories based on their mechanism of action, namely collagen plug-based VCDs, clips-based VCDs and suture -based VCDs These devices may reduce the risk of access site complications. To further examine the safety of VCDs with the up-to-date evidence, we conducted a meta-analysis of the studies so far in order to come to a more reliable conclusion.

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call