1
|
Krishnan P, Farhan S, Zidar F, Krajcer Z, Metzger C, Kapadia S, Moore E, Nazif T, Garland T, Zhang M, Khera S, Sharafuddin M, Patel VI, Bacharach JM, Coady P, Schermerhorn ML, Shames ML, Rahimi S, Panneton JM, Elkins C, Foteh M. Cross-Seal IDE Trial: Prospective, Multicenter, Single-Arm Study of the Cross-Seal Suture-Mediated Vascular Closure Device System. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2024; 17:e013842. [PMID: 38708595 DOI: 10.1161/circinterventions.123.013842] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2023] [Accepted: 03/06/2024] [Indexed: 05/07/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND An increasing number of interventional procedures require large-sheath technology (>12F) with a favorable outcome with endovascular rather than open surgical access. However, vascular complications are a limitation for the management of these patients. This trial aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of the Cross-Seal suture-mediated vascular closure device in obtaining hemostasis at the target limb access site following interventional procedures using 8F to 18F procedural sheaths. METHODS The Cross-Seal IDE trial (Investigational Device Exemption) was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter study in subjects undergoing percutaneous endovascular procedures utilizing 8F to 18F ID procedural sheaths. The primary efficacy end point was time to hemostasis at the target limb access site. The primary safety end point was freedom from major complications of the target limb access site within 30 days post procedure. RESULTS A total of 147 subjects were enrolled between August 9, 2019, and March 12, 2020. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement was performed in 53.7% (79/147) and percutaneous endovascular abdominal/thoracic aortic aneurysm repair in 46.3% (68/147) of subjects. The mean sheath ID was 15.5±1.8 mm. The primary effectiveness end point of time to hemostasis was 0.4±1.4 minutes. An adjunctive intervention was required in 9.2% (13/142) of subjects, of which 2.1% (3/142) were surgical and 5.6% (8/142) endovascular. Technical success was achieved in 92.3% (131/142) of subjects. Freedom from major complications of the target limb access site was 94.3% (83/88). CONCLUSIONS In selected patients undergoing percutaneous endovascular procedures utilizing 8F to 18F ID procedural sheath, Cross-Seal suture-mediated vascular closure device achieved favorable effectiveness and safety in the closure of the large-bore arteriotomy. REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03756558.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Prakash Krishnan
- Department of Cardiology, Zena and Michael A. Wiener Cardiovascular Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (P.K., S.F., S. Khera)
| | - Serdar Farhan
- Department of Cardiology, Zena and Michael A. Wiener Cardiovascular Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (P.K., S.F., S. Khera)
| | - Frank Zidar
- Department of Cardiology, Austin Heart, TX (F.Z.)
| | - Zvonimir Krajcer
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Texas Heart Institute, Houston (Z.K.)
| | - Christopher Metzger
- Department of Cardiology, Wellmont Holston Valley Medical Center, Kingsport, TN (C.M.)
| | - Samir Kapadia
- Department of Cardiology, Cleveland Clinic, OH (S. Kapadia)
| | - Erin Moore
- Department of Vascular Surgery, River City Clinical Research, Jacksonville, FL (E.M.)
| | - Tamim Nazif
- Department of Cardiology, Columbia University, New York, NY (T.N.)
| | - Ty Garland
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Vascular Institute of the Rockies, Denver, CO (T.G.)
| | - Ming Zhang
- Department of Cardiology, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA (M.Z.)
| | - Sahil Khera
- Department of Cardiology, Zena and Michael A. Wiener Cardiovascular Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (P.K., S.F., S. Khera)
| | - Mel Sharafuddin
- Department of Vascular Surgery, University of Iowa, Iowa City (M.S.)
| | - Virendra I Patel
- New York Presbyterian, Columbia University, New York, NY (V.I.P.)
| | | | - Paul Coady
- Department of Cardiology, Lankenau Medical Center, Wynnewood, PA (P.C.)
| | - Marc L Schermerhorn
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA (M.L. Schermerhorn)
| | - Murray L Shames
- Department of Vascular Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa (M.L. Shames)
| | - Saum Rahimi
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ (S.R.)
| | - Jean M Panneton
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Sentara Vascular Specialists, Norfolk, VA (J.P.)
| | - Craig Elkins
- Department of Vascular Surgery, INTEGRIS Baptist Medical Center, Oklahoma City, OK (C.E.)
| | - Mazin Foteh
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgeons, Austin, TX (M.F.)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Marcusohn E, Qasum M, Epstein D, Solomonica A, Orbach A, Musallam A, Kerner A, Feld Y. Vascular Complications Among Patients Undergoing Trans-femoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Prostar vs ProGlide Parallel Technique. Angiology 2022; 73:635-642. [PMID: 35147041 DOI: 10.1177/00033197211058498] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Reliable femoral artery closure devices are essential for the success of trans-femoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) procedures. Accordingly, device choice might affect vascular complications and bleeding rates. This was a retrospective analysis, comparing vascular complication rates among patients who underwent trans-femoral TAVI with vascular access closure using either the ProGlide parallel suture or Prostar closure devices. We included 191 patients: 106 were treated with Prostar and 85 with ProGlide. The ProGlide group had higher rate of diabetes, chronic kidney disease, peripheral arterial disease, and significantly smaller femoral arteries that were treated via larger sheaths. Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 major complications were similar between the groups. (4.7% for ProGlide vs 3.8% for Prostar, P=1), with similar incidence of closure device failure (2 vs 3, P=1). No differences were found after univariant analysis and propensity-score matching in the incidence of major and minor bleeding nor in the rate of in-hospital mortality between ProGlide and Prostar (4.7 vs 2.8%, P=.7, 1.2 vs 2.8%, P=.63, and 1.2 vs .0%, P=.45, respectively). Parallel suture technique using two ProGlide sutures showed comparable rates of vascular complications to the Prostar closure device in higher risk population of TAVI patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erez Marcusohn
- Department of Cardiology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Majd Qasum
- Department of Cardiology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Danny Epstein
- Critical Care Division, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Amir Solomonica
- Department of Cardiology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.,Rappaport - Faculty of Medicine, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| | - Ady Orbach
- Schulich Heart Center - Sunnybrook Health Science Center, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Anees Musallam
- Department of Cardiology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
| | - Arthur Kerner
- Department of Cardiology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.,Rappaport - Faculty of Medicine, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| | - Yair Feld
- Department of Cardiology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.,Rappaport - Faculty of Medicine, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
| |
Collapse
|