Femoral Artery Closure Devices vs Manual Compression During Cardiac Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Impact of Sex on Outcomes With Femoral Artery Closure Devices Versus Manual Compression in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background and Aims

Femoral artery access is widely used despite recent increase in radial access for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Femoral artery closure devices are used to shorten vascular closure time and reduce bleeding. We sought to examine sex-based outcomes of femoral artery vascular closure devices (VCD) in patients undergoing PCI.

Methods

We identified patients who had undergone PCI (n = 11,415) in the Indiana University Health Multicenter Cardiac Cath registry using femoral artery access. Clinical outcomes were compared between VCD and manual compression and analyzed according to sex. Patients with cardiogenic shock and left ventricular support devices were excluded.

Results

The use of any vascular closure device as compared to femoral artery manual compression was associated with a reduction in 72-h bleeding events (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46-0.87). With manual compression, women had higher rates of 72-h bleeding as compared to men (4.5% vs. 1.6%, p < 0.001). Women demonstrated greater absolute risk reduction in 72-h bleeding events with use of VCD as compared to men (2.8% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.001). For women, VCD were associated with lower risk of access site bleeding (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.24-0.8), hematoma (OR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.2-0.63), and vascular complications (OR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.09-0.72). Use of VCD was associated with lower risk of in-hospital death (adjusted OR: 0.4; 95% CI: 0.28-0.58; p < 0.001) in multivariable regression analysis.

Conclusion

Women derive more benefit from use of femoral artery VCD during PCI than men with greater reduction in bleeding rates, access site hematoma, and vascular complications.

Peak Procedural ACT Is Associated With All-Cause Mortality After Femoral Access PCI

Background

A minimum threshold activated clotting time (ACT) to guide heparin dosing during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with lower ischemic complications. However, data are variable regarding the risk of high ACT levels. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of peak procedural ACT on complications and mortality for transfemoral and transradial access PCI.

Methods

The UC San Diego Health National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry was used to obtain data on patients who underwent native vessel PCI from January 2007 to September 2022. Coronary artery bypass graft patients and those who received bivalirudin were excluded. Complications and all-cause mortality at 30 days and 1-year post-PCI were assessed by ACT tertile.

Results

A total of 2473 patients (age 65 ± 12 years; 74% male) undergoing PCI with 53% femoral and 47% radial access were included. The majority (82%) had 1-vessel coronary artery disease with heterogeneous clinical presentations (21.8% ST-elevation myocardial infarction, 25.4% non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, 4.9% unstable angina, 33.8% stable angina, 3.4% atypical chest pain, 10.7% other indication for PCI). With femoral access, patients in the third tertile (ACT ≥ 275) had significantly higher all-cause mortality at 30 days (5.3% vs 2.7% vs 0.9%; P < .001), 6 months (6.3% vs 4.0% vs 2.0%; P = .007), and 1 year (9.0% vs 6.0% vs 2.7%; P < .001) compared to the second (ACT 228-275) and first tertile (ACT ≤ 228), respectively. A 30-day landmark analysis revealed that there was no difference in all-cause mortality beyond 30 days (3.9% vs 3.4% vs 1.8%; P = .176). There were increased bleeding complications in the highest tertile (12.8% vs 9.8% vs 7.5%; P = .034) and a higher need for blood products (10.4% vs 6.7% vs 5.4%; P = .014). There was no difference in ischemic major adverse cardiovascular events specifically periprocedural myocardial infarction or stroke between tertiles. There was no difference in clinical outcomes by peak ACT for patients who had radial access.

Conclusions

Higher ACT with transfemoral access PCI was associated with increased 30-day mortality, bleeding complications, and need for blood products post-PCI.

Comparing Obtura Vascular Closure Device to Manual Compression for Achieving Hemostasis After Percutaneous Transfemoral Procedures: A Randomized Study

PURPOSE

This trial was designed and aimed to compare safety and efficacy of Obtura™ vascular closure device (VCD) to manual compression (MC) among patients undergoing transfemoral catheterization.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial of Obtura VCD against MC randomized patients in 1:1 (n=268; 134:134) ratio. Safety and efficacy were measured by primary endpoints (time to hemostasis [TTH] and deployment success) and secondary endpoints which included technical success, device-related adverse events, and time to ambulation (TTA).

RESULTS

The procedural access using right femoral artery was performed in 95.52% of patients in Obtura VCD versus 96.27% in standard MC method, whereas 2.99% of patients in each group underwent left femoral access. Bilateral access was performed in 1.49% (n=2) versus 0.75% (n=1) in Obtura VCD versus MC, respectively. Both the technical success and deployment success were 100%. Patients in Obtura VCD group had shorter TTH (3.26±3.39 vs 23.95±8.24 minutes; p<0.0001) and TTA (155.44±125.32 vs 723.84±197.98 minutes; p<0.0001) than MC group. No access site complications (re-bleeding, infection, arteriovenous fistula, and transient access site nerve injury) were noted at 2-week, 1-month, and 3-month follow-ups. There were 4 (3%) and 6 (4.5%) cases of hematoma, respectively, in Obtura VCD versus MC and 1 case (0.7%) of post-procedural arterial pseudoaneurysm each in both the groups which were successfully resolved and patients were discharged with no further complications. Further follow-up was without any adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy of Obtura™ VCD with a significantly short TTH and TTA compared to MC.

CLINICAL IMPACT

In patients undergoing cardiac catheterization, vascular closure devices (VCDs) can achieve hemostasis faster after successful implantation of the device with fewer complications such as bleeding and ambulation can be achieved faster. In terms of effectiveness, Obtura VCD was found to be better than manual compression in achieving early hemostasis and higher technical and deployment success was accomplished. Obtura VCD does not require enlargement of the route through the tissues, uses the same existing arterial sheath as its conduit, and does not cause patients' access sites to feel uncomfortable while it is being deployed.