Complications in places of percutaneous coronary interventions: comparison of manual compression and clip application devices to achieve hemostasis
https://doi.org/10.30629/0023-2149-2020-98-5-349-355
Abstract
Vascular closure devices, used for over 20 years as an alternative to manual compression to achieve hemostasis. Although the clinical effi cacy and safety of clip application devices type VCD have been confi rmed in several studies, their use remains controversial due to complications in the access by using these devices. The purpose of this study — comparing the frequency of formation of regional vascular complications , risk factors for these complications, hemostatic time, duration of immobilization, the period of stay in hospital and the patients comfort level after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with the traditional manual hemostasis and using VCD. For a retrospective analysis of medical records were selected 246 adult patients from City Hospital of Moscow n.a. M.P. Konchalovskiy, SMRC in Moscow which was performed PCI. The main group, where hemostasis after endovascular procedures was achieved with the help of clip application device StarClose SE (Abbott Vascular), made up of 128 patients, control group — 118 patients with carrying out manual hemostasis. Evaluation of subjective sensations (pain, numbness, etc.) was carried out using a rating scale. The frequency of complications in the study group was 6.25% in the control group — 6.78%. The comfort level of patients was higher in the study group. The results showed that the use of StarClose device to achieve hemostasis after PCI does not increase the frequency of regional vascular complications compared with manual hemostasis. At the same time, the use of vascular closure devices is an eff ective way to reduce hemostasis time, can reduce the period of immobilization of the patient, which increases patient comfort and reduces the patient’s stay in the hospital.
About the Authors
I. G. Sitko
M.P. Konchalovskiy of Department of Healthcare of Moscow
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
I. S. Bazanov
M.P. Konchalovskiy of Department of Healthcare of Moscow
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
E. B. Molokhoev
Clinical Нospital №1 Presidental Aff airs Russian Federation
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
B. A. Rudenko
SMRC Preventive Medicine of Department of Healthcare
Russian Federation
101000, Moscow
Russian Federation
101000, Moscow
M. V. Lokshina
A.A. Vishnevsky 3 Central Clinical Military Hospital Defense Ministry RF
Russian Federation
143420, Krasnogorsk
Russian Federation
143420, Krasnogorsk
N. V. Zakaryan
Clinical Нospital №1 Presidental Aff airs Russian Federation
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
V. N. Ardashev
Clinical Нospital №1 Presidental Aff airs Russian Federation
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
Russian Federation
124489, Moscow, Zelenograd
References
1. Bokeria L.A. Complications arising in the performance of endovascular interventions. Prevention and treatment. Interventional treatment of coronary heart disease. M.: NTSSSH them. Bakulev RAMS. 2002:322. (in Russian)
2. Byrne R.A., Cassese S, Linhardt M, Kastrati A. Vascular access and closure in coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention.Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 2013;10(1):27–40.
3. Bokeria L.A. Endovascular diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the heart and blood vessels in the Russian Federation. M.: NTSSSH them. Bakulev RAMS. 2010:44–45. (in Russian)
4. Batyraliev T., Ayalp M.R., Sercelik A., Karben Z., Dinler G., Besnili F. et al. Complications of cardiac catheterization: a single center study. Angiology. 2005;56(1):75–80.
5. Hamel W.J. Femoral artery closure after cardiac catheterization. Crit. Care Nurse. 2009;29(1):39–46.
6. Semitko S.P., Babenko I.M., Imanaliev A.I., Azarov A.V., Maisky V.V., Karpun N.A., Ioseliani D.G. Vascular complications of percutaneous coronary interventions and clinical results of the use of various devices providing hemostasis. Consilium medicum. 2012;10:51–57. (in Russian)
7. Grossman P.M., Gurm H.S., Mcnamara R., Lalonde T., Changezi H., Share D. et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention complications and guide catheter size: bigger is not better. JACC-Cardiovasc Inte. 2009;2(7):636–44.
8. Steff enino G., Dutto S., Conte L., Dutto M., Lice G., Tomatis M., et al. Vascular access complications after cardiac catheterisation: a nurse-led quality assurance program. Eur. J. Cardiovasc Nurs. 2006;5(1):31–6.
9. Hoglund J., Stenestrand U., Todt T. The eff ect of early mobilization for patient undergoing coronary angiography: a pilot study with focus on vascular complications and back pain. Eur. J. Cardiovasc. Nur. 2011;10:130–6.
10. Dumont C.J.P. Blood pressure and risks of vascular complications after percutaneous coronary intervention. Dimen. Crit. Care Nurs. 2007;26(3):121–7.
11. Cheng K.Y., Chair S.Y., Choi K.C. Access site complications and puncture site pain following transradial coronary procedures: a correlational study. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2013;50:1303–13.
12. Chair S.Y., Thompson D.R., Li S.K. The eff ect of ambulation after cardiac catheterization on patient outcomes. J. Clin. Nurs. 2007;16(1):212–4.
13. Hoglund J., Stenestrand U., Todt T. The eff ect of early mobilization for patient undergoing coronary angiography: a pilot study with focus on vascular complications and back pain. Eur. J. Cardiovasc. Nur. 2011;10:130–136.
14. Augustin A.C., Quadros A.S., Sarmento-Leite R.E. Early sheath removal and ambulation in patients submitted to percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized clinical trial. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2010;47:939–45.
15. Mohammady M., Atoof F., Sari A.A., Zolfaghari M. Bed rest duration after sheath removal following percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic review and meta analysis.J. Clin. Nurs. 2013. doi: 10.1111/jocn.12313.
16. Schiks I.E.J.M., Schoonhoven L., Aengevaeren W.R.M., Nogarede-Hoekstra C., van Achterberg T., Verheugt F.W.A. Ambulation after femoral sheath removal in percutaneous coronary intervention: a prospective comparison of early vs. late ambulation. J. Clin. Nurs. 2009;18(13):1862–1870.
17. Tapping C.R., Dixon S., Little M.W., Bratby M.J., Anthony S., Uberoi R. StarClose arterial closure after conversion from retrograde to antegrade access.Clin. Radiol. 2012.
18. Gaba R.C., Parvinian A, Trinos E.M., Padayao S.V., Francisco R.M., Yap F.Y., Knuttinen M.G., Owens C.A., Bui J.T. Safety and effi cacy of StarClose SE Vascular Closure System in high-risk liver interventional oncology patients. J. Vasc. Access. 2012.
19. Resnic F.S., Wang T.Y., Arora N., Vidi V., Dai D., Ou F.S., Matheny M.E. Quantifying the learning curve in the use of a novel vascular closure device: an analysis of the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) CathPCI registry. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 2012;5(1):82–9.
20. Burke M.N., Hermiller J., Jaff M.R. StarClose® vascular closure system (VCS) is safe and eff ective in patients who ambulate early following successful femoral artery access closure-results from the RISE clinical trial.Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2012;80(1):45–52.
21. Durack J.C., Thor Johnson D., Fidelman N., Kerlan R.K., Laberge J.M. Entrapment of the StarClose Vascular Closure System After Attempted Common Femoral Artery Deployment.Cardiovasc. Intervent. Radiol. 2012;35(4):942–4.
22. Chodór P., Kurek T., Kowalczuk A., Świerad M., Wąs T., Honisz G., Świątkowski A., Streb W., Kalarus Z. Radial vs femoral approach with StarClose clip placement for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. RADIAMI II: a prospective, randomised, single centre trial. Kardiol. Pol. 2011;69(8):763–71.
23. Spiliopoulos S., Katsanos K., Karnabatidis D., Diamantopoulos A., Nikolaos C., Siablis D. Safety and effi cacy of the StarClose vascular closure device in more than 1000 consecutive peripheral angioplasty procedures. J. Endovasc. Ther. 2011;18(3):435–443.
24. Rodriguez A., Katz S.G. The use of the StarClose device for obtaining femoral artery hemostasis. Vasc. Endovascular Surg. 2011;45(7):627–30.
25. Bangalore S., Vidi V.D., Liu C.B., Shah P.B., Resnic F.S. Effi cacy and safety of the nitinol clip-based vascular closure device (Starclose) for closure of common femoral arterial cannulation at or near the bifurcation: a propensity score-adjusted analysis. J. Invasive Cardiol. 2011;23(5):194–9.
26. Iqtidar A.F., Li D., Mather J., McKay R.G. Propensity matched analysis of bleeding and vascular complications associated with vascular closure devices vs standard manual compression following percutaneous coronary intervention. Conn. Med. 2011;75(1):5–10.
27. Schwartz B.G., Burstein S., Economides C., Kloner R.A., Shavelle D.M., Mayeda G.S. Review of vascular closure devices. J. Invasive Cardiol. 2010;22(12):599–607.
28. Chiu A.H., Coles S.R., Tibballs J., Nadkarni S. The StarClose vascular closure device in antegrade and retrograde punctures: a single-center experience. J. Endovasc. Ther. 2010;17(1):46–50.
29. Hoglund J., Stenestrand U., Todt T. The eff ect of early mobilization for patient undergoing coronary angiography: a pilot study with focus on vascular complications and back pain. Eur. J. Cardiovasc. Nur. 2011;10:130–136.
30. Augustin A.C., Quadros A.S., Sarmento-Leite R.E. Early sheath removal and ambulation in patients submitted to percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized clinical trial. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2010;47:939–945.
31. Arora N., Matheny M.E., Sepke C., Resnic F.S. A propensity analysis of the risk of vascular complications after cardiac catheterization procedures with the use of vascular closure devices. Am. Heart J. 2007;153(4):606–611.
32. Grossman P.M., Gurm H.S., Mcnamara R., Lalonde T., Changezi H., Share D. et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention complications and guide catheter size: bigger is not better. JACC-Cardiovasc. Inte. 2009;2(7):636–644.
33. Dumont C.J.P., Keeling A.W., Bourgignon C., Sarembock I.J., Turner M. Predictors of vascular complications post diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary interventions. Dimen. Crit. Care Nur. 2006;25(3):137–142.
Review
For citations:
Sitko I.G., Bazanov I.S., Molokhoev E.B., Rudenko B.A., Lokshina M.V., Zakaryan N.V., Ardashev V.N. Complications in places of percutaneous coronary interventions: comparison of manual compression and clip application devices to achieve hemostasis. Clinical Medicine (Russian Journal). 2020;98(5):349-355. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30629/0023-2149-2020-98-5-349-355
Views:
771
Email this article 