首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Suture- or Plug-Based Large-Bore Arteriotomy Closure: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Authors:Maarten P. van Wiechen  Didier Tchétché  Joris F. Ooms  Thijmen W. Hokken  Herbert Kroon  Francesca Ziviello  Angie Ghattas  Saifullah Siddiqui  Clémence Laperche  Ernest Spitzer  Joost Daemen  Peter P. de Jaegere  Nicolas Dumonteil  Nicolas M. Van Mieghem
Affiliation:1. Department of Cardiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands;2. Department of Cardiology, Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France
Abstract:ObjectivesThis study sought to test the superiority in terms of efficacy and safety of a dedicated plug-based vascular closure device (VCD) during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) over a suture-based VCD.BackgroundVascular complications after TAVR are relevant and often associated with VCD failure.MethodsThe MASH (MANTA vs. Suture-based vascular closure after transcatHeter aortic valve replacement) trial is an international, 2-center pilot randomized controlled trial comparing the MANTA VCD (Teleflex, Wayne, Pennsylvania) versus 2 ProGlides (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, Illinois). The primary composite endpoint consisted of access site–related major or minor vascular complications at 30-days’ follow-up. Secondary endpoints included clinically relevant access site bleeding, time to hemostasis, and modified VCD failure (defined as failure to achieve hemostasis within 5 min or requiring additional endovascular maneuvers such as endovascular stenting, surgical techniques, or additional closure devices). Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee according to the VARC-2 definitions.ResultsA total of 210 TAVR patients were included between October 2018 and January 2020. Median age was 81 years, 54% were male, and the median STS score was 2.7%. There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of access site–related vascular complications between MANTA and ProGlide (10% vs. 4%; p = 0.16). Clinically significant access site bleedings were similar with both closure techniques (9% vs. 6%; p = 0.57). Modified VCD failure occurred less frequently in MANTA versus ProGlide (20% vs. 40%; p < 0.01). Suture-based closure required more often additional closure devices, whereas MANTA numerically needed more covered stents and surgical bailouts.ConclusionsPlug-based large-bore arteriotomy closure was not superior to suture-based closure. Plug-based closure required fewer, but a different kind of bailout maneuvers.
Keywords:MANTA  ProGlide  transcatheter aortic valve replacement  vascular closure devices  vascular complications  ACT"  },{"  #name"  :"  keyword"  ,"  $"  :{"  id"  :"  kwrd0040"  },"  $$"  :[{"  #name"  :"  text"  ,"  _"  :"  activated clotting time  BMI"  },{"  #name"  :"  keyword"  ,"  $"  :{"  id"  :"  kwrd0050"  },"  $$"  :[{"  #name"  :"  text"  ,"  _"  :"  body mass index  STS"  },{"  #name"  :"  keyword"  ,"  $"  :{"  id"  :"  kwrd0060"  },"  $$"  :[{"  #name"  :"  text"  ,"  _"  :"  Society of Thoracic Surgeons  TAVR"  },{"  #name"  :"  keyword"  ,"  $"  :{"  id"  :"  kwrd0070"  },"  $$"  :[{"  #name"  :"  text"  ,"  _"  :"  transcatheter aortic valve replacement  VCD"  },{"  #name"  :"  keyword"  ,"  $"  :{"  id"  :"  kwrd0080"  },"  $$"  :[{"  #name"  :"  text"  ,"  _"  :"  vascular closure device
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号