Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Vascular Closure: the ABC's. [Review]

MedStar author(s):

Citation: Current Cardiology Reports. 24(4):355-364, 2022 Apr.PMID: 35239082Institution: MedStar Heart & Vascular Institute | MedStar Washington Hospital CenterDepartment: Advanced Cardiac Catheterization Research FellowshipForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal Article | ReviewSubject headings: *Endovascular Procedures | *Vascular Closure Devices | Femoral Artery | Hemostatic Techniques/ae [Adverse Effects] | Humans | Punctures | Treatment Outcome | Vascular Closure Devices/ae [Adverse Effects]Year: 2022 ISSN:

1523-3782

Name of journal: Current cardiology reportsAbstract: PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Vascular access and closure is a key part of endovascular procedures, and access site-related complications are an independent predictor of adverse procedural outcomes. The purpose of this review is to discuss the methods of vascular closure including manual compression, vascular closure devices (VCDs) for both arterial and venous arteriotomies, their mechanisms, and access site-related complications.RECENT FINDINGS: Various VCDs have been approved over the last three decades. These devices have different mechanisms to achieve hemostasis and are generally categorized into active and passive approximators. Studies have largely found that they are non-inferior to manual compression. Uncomplicated vascular closure is pertinent to avoid adverse procedure-related outcomes. The emergence of VCDs has reduced time to hemostasis, facilitating early ambulation and discharge and reducing hospitalization cost with comparable complication rate to manual compression. Nonetheless, they should be used in favorable vascular anatomy and are not intended to reduce complications. Copyright ♭ 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.All authors: Bhogal S, Waksman ROriginally published: Current Cardiology Reports. 2022 Mar 03Fiscal year: FY2022 Digital Object Identifier:

https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11886-022-01654-z

ORCID:

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9212-557X http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4063-9226 http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9212-557X http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4063-9226
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9212-557X http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4063-9226 http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9212-557X http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4063-9226

Date added to catalog: 2022-03-17

Holdings ( 1 )
Title notes ( 3 )

Holdings
Item type	Current library	Collection	Call number	Status	Date due	Barcode
Journal Article	MedStar Authors Catalog	Article	35239082	Available		35239082

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Vascular access and closure is a key part of endovascular procedures, and access site-related complications are an independent predictor of adverse procedural outcomes. The purpose of this review is to discuss the methods of vascular closure including manual compression, vascular closure devices (VCDs) for both arterial and venous arteriotomies, their mechanisms, and access site-related complications.

RECENT FINDINGS: Various VCDs have been approved over the last three decades. These devices have different mechanisms to achieve hemostasis and are generally categorized into active and passive approximators. Studies have largely found that they are non-inferior to manual compression. Uncomplicated vascular closure is pertinent to avoid adverse procedure-related outcomes. The emergence of VCDs has reduced time to hemostasis, facilitating early ambulation and discharge and reducing hospitalization cost with comparable complication rate to manual compression. Nonetheless, they should be used in favorable vascular anatomy and are not intended to reduce complications. Copyright ♭ 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

English