000 04739nam a22006737a 4500
008 200709s20202020 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022 _a1526-6028
024 _a10.1177/1526602820912224 [doi]
040 _aOvid MEDLINE(R)
099 _a32193971
245 _aPivotal Clinical Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of the MANTA Vascular Closure Device During Percutaneous EVAR and TEVAR Procedures.
251 _aJournal of Endovascular Therapy. 27(3):414-420, 2020 Jun.
252 _aJ Endovasc Ther. 27(3):414-420, 2020 Jun.
252 _zJ Endovasc Ther. :1526602820912224, 2020 Mar 20
253 _aJournal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists
260 _c2020
260 _fFY2020
265 _saheadofprint
265 _sppublish
266 _d2020-07-09
268 _aJournal of Endovascular Therapy. :1526602820912224, 2020 Mar 20
520 _aPurpose: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the MANTA percutaneous vascular closure device in patients undergoing percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair (PEVAR) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Materials and Methods: The SAFE MANTA Study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02908880) was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter trial in patients undergoing endovascular interventions using large-bore sheaths (transcatheter aortic valve replacement, PEVAR, or TEVAR) at 20 sites in North America. Patient selection intended to test the MANTA device in populations without morbid obesity, severe calcification, or a severely scarred femoral access area. Of the 263 patients enrolled in the primary analysis cohort, 53 (20.2%) patients (mean age 74.9+/-8.9 years; 41 men) underwent PEVAR (n=51) or TEVAR (n=2) procedures and form the cohort for this subgroup analysis. Per protocol a single MANTA device was deployed in all PEVAR/TEVAR cases. Results: The mean time to hemostasis in the PEVAR/TEVAR cohort was 35+/-91 seconds, with a median time of 19 seconds vs 24 seconds in the overall SAFE MANTA population. The MANTA device met the definition for technical success in 52 (98%) of 53 PEVAR/TEVAR cases compared with 97.7% in the overall SAFE MANTA population. One (1.9%) major complication (access-site stenosis) occurred in this subgroup compared to 14 (5.3%) events in the SAFE population. In the PEVAR/TEVAR group, 1 pseudoaneurysm was noted prior to discharge, another at 30-day follow-up, and one at 60 days. One (1.9%) of the 3 minor pseudoaneurysms was treated with ultrasound-guided compression and the other 2 required no treatment. Conclusion: The MANTA device demonstrated a short time to hemostasis and low complication rates compared with published literature results of other percutaneous closure devices. Time to hemostasis and complication rates were comparable between the PEVAR/TEVAR patients and the full SAFE MANTA study cohort. The MANTA device provides reliable closure with a single percutaneous device for PEVAR/TEVAR procedures.
546 _aEnglish
650 _a*Aorta, Thoracic/su [Surgery]
650 _a*Aortic Aneurysm/su [Surgery]
650 _a*Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation
650 _a*Catheterization, Peripheral
650 _a*Endovascular Procedures
650 _a*Hemorrhage/pc [Prevention & Control]
650 _a*Hemostasis
650 _a*Hemostatic Techniques/is [Instrumentation]
650 _a*Vascular Closure Devices
650 _aAged
650 _aAged, 80 and over
650 _aAorta, Thoracic/dg [Diagnostic Imaging]
650 _aAortic Aneurysm/dg [Diagnostic Imaging]
650 _aBlood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aBlood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/is [Instrumentation]
650 _aCatheterization, Peripheral/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aEndovascular Procedures/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aEndovascular Procedures/is [Instrumentation]
650 _aFemale
650 _aHemorrhage/bl [Blood]
650 _aHemorrhage/et [Etiology]
650 _aHemostatic Techniques/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aHumans
650 _aMale
650 _aNorth America
650 _aProspective Studies
650 _aPunctures
650 _aTime Factors
650 _aTreatment Outcome
651 _aMedStar Heart & Vascular Institute
657 _aJournal Article
700 _aBernardo, Nelson L
790 _aAziz M, Bacharach JM, Bernardo N, Campbell J, Dake MD, Krajcer Z, Lee JT, Lumsden A, Metzger C, Nanjundappa A, Nardone S, Strickman N, Wood DA
856 _uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1526602820912224
_zhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1526602820912224
942 _cART
_dArticle
999 _c5194
_d5194