A randomised controlled trial comparing the routine use of an Angio-Seal STS device strategy with conventional femoral haemostasis methods in a district general hospital

International Journal of Clinical Practice

Volumn 61, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 367-372

  Behan, M W H ^a   Large, J K ^a   Patel, N R ^a   Lloyd, G W ^a   Sulke, A N ^a  

^a EASTBOURNE DISTRICT GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GENERAL HOSPITAL; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEMATOMA; HEMOSTASIS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MOBILIZATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; SUTURE;

AGED; AMBULATORY CARE; FEMORAL ARTERY; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEMOSTASIS; HEMOSTATIC TECHNIQUES; HOSPITALIZATION; HOSPITALS, DISTRICT; HOSPITALS, GENERAL; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SUTURE TECHNIQUES; SUTURES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33847078434     PISSN: 13685031     EISSN: 17421241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2006.01229.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Prayack JB, Wall TC, Longabough P et al. A randomized trial of vascular stasis techniques to reduce femoral vascular complications after coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol 1998; 81: 970-6.
2. Aguirre FV, Topol EJ, Ferguson JJ et al. Bleeding complications with the chimeric antibody to platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa integrin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation 1995; 91: 2882-90.
3. Bogart DB, Bogart MA, Miller JT et al. Femoral artery catheterization complications: a study of 503 consecutive patients. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1995; 34: 8-13.
4. Gradinscak DJ, Young N, Jones Y et al. Risks of outpatient angiography and interventional procedures: a prospective study. AJR 2004; 183: 377-81.
5. Hoffer EK, Bloch RD. Percutaneous arterial closure devices. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003; 14: 865-85.
6. Nikolsky E, Mehran R, Halkin A et al. Vascular complications associated with arteriotomy devices in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44: 1200-9.
7. Koreny M, Riedmuller E, Nikfardjam M et al. Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterisation. Systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 2004; 291: 350-7.
8. Duffin DC, Muhlestein JB, Allison SB et al. Femoral arterial puncture management after percutaneous coronary procedures: a comparison of clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between manual compression and two different vascular closure devices. J Invasive Cardiol 2001; 13: 354-62.
9. Jones MR, McClure RR. Vascular site access angiography. Considerations for arteriotomy closure with the Angio-Seal vascular closure device. St Jude Med Monogr 2004; 1.
10. O'Sullivan GJ, Buckenham TM, Belli AM. The use of the Angio-Seal haemostatic puncture closure device in high-risk patients. Clin Radiol 1999; 54: 51-5.
11. Applegate RJ, Rankin KM, Little WC et al. Restick following initial Angioseal use. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003; 58: 181-4.
12. Applegate RJ, Grabarczyk MA, Little WC et al. Vascular closure devices in patients treated with anticoagulation and IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors during percutaneous revascularisation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 40: 78-83.
13. Jessup DB, Coletti AT, Muhlestein JB et al. Elective coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention during uninterrupted warfarin therapy. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003; 60: 180-4.
14. Dangas G, Mehran R, Kokolis S et al. Vascular complications after percutaneous coronary interventions following haemostasis with manual compression versus arteriotomy closure devices. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 38: 638-41.
15. Tavris D, Gross T, Gallauresi B, Kessler L. Arteriotomy closure devices - the FDA perspective. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001: 38: 642-4.