open access

Vol 26, No 3 (2019)
Original articles — Interventional cardiology
Published online: 2018-03-29
Get Citation

Thermic sealing in femoral catheterization: First experience with the Secure Device

Michael Sacherer, Ewald Kolesnik, Friederike von Lewinski, Nicolas Verheyen, Karin Brandner, Markus Wallner, Deborah M. Eaton, Olev Luha, Robert Zweiker, Dirk von Lewinski
DOI: 10.5603/CJ.a2018.0035
·
Pubmed: 29611164
·
Cardiol J 2019;26(3):233-240.

open access

Vol 26, No 3 (2019)
Original articles — Interventional cardiology
Published online: 2018-03-29

Abstract

Background: Devices currently used to achieve hemostasis of the femoral artery following percutaneous cardiac catheterization are associated with vascular complications and remnants of artificial materials are retained at the puncture site. The Secure arterial closure Device induces hemostasis by utilizing thermal energy, which causes collagen shrinking and swelling. In comparison to established devices, it has the advantage of leaving no foreign material in the body following closing. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Secure Device to close the puncture site following percutaneous cardiac catheterization.

Methods: The Secure Device was evaluated in a prospective non-randomized single-center trial with patients undergoing 6 F invasive cardiac procedures. A total of 67 patients were enrolled and the device was utilized in 63 patients. Fifty diagnostic and 13 interventional cases were evaluated. Femoral artery puncture closure was performed immediately after completion of the procedure. Time to hemostasis (TTH), time to ambulation (TTA) and data regarding short-term and 30-day clinical follow-up were recorded.

Results: Mean TTH was 4:30 ± 2:15 min in the overall observational group. A subpopulation of patients receiving anticoagulants had a TTH of 4:53 ± 1:43 min. There were two access site complications (hematoma > 5 cm). No major adverse events were identified during hospitalization or at the 30 day follow-up.

Conclusions: The new Secure Device demonstrates that it is feasible in diagnostic and interventional cardiac catheterization. With respect to safety, the Secure Device was non-inferior to other closure devices as tested in the ISAR closure trial.

Abstract

Background: Devices currently used to achieve hemostasis of the femoral artery following percutaneous cardiac catheterization are associated with vascular complications and remnants of artificial materials are retained at the puncture site. The Secure arterial closure Device induces hemostasis by utilizing thermal energy, which causes collagen shrinking and swelling. In comparison to established devices, it has the advantage of leaving no foreign material in the body following closing. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Secure Device to close the puncture site following percutaneous cardiac catheterization.

Methods: The Secure Device was evaluated in a prospective non-randomized single-center trial with patients undergoing 6 F invasive cardiac procedures. A total of 67 patients were enrolled and the device was utilized in 63 patients. Fifty diagnostic and 13 interventional cases were evaluated. Femoral artery puncture closure was performed immediately after completion of the procedure. Time to hemostasis (TTH), time to ambulation (TTA) and data regarding short-term and 30-day clinical follow-up were recorded.

Results: Mean TTH was 4:30 ± 2:15 min in the overall observational group. A subpopulation of patients receiving anticoagulants had a TTH of 4:53 ± 1:43 min. There were two access site complications (hematoma > 5 cm). No major adverse events were identified during hospitalization or at the 30 day follow-up.

Conclusions: The new Secure Device demonstrates that it is feasible in diagnostic and interventional cardiac catheterization. With respect to safety, the Secure Device was non-inferior to other closure devices as tested in the ISAR closure trial.

Get Citation

Keywords

catheterization; vascular closure device; thermal vascular occlusion; Secure Device System; femoral vascular access

Supplementary Files (2)
Supplemental Material. Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Download
13KB
VIDEO
Download
11MB
About this article
Title

Thermic sealing in femoral catheterization: First experience with the Secure Device

Journal

Cardiology Journal

Issue

Vol 26, No 3 (2019)

Pages

233-240

Published online

2018-03-29

DOI

10.5603/CJ.a2018.0035

Pubmed

29611164

Bibliographic record

Cardiol J 2019;26(3):233-240.

Keywords

catheterization
vascular closure device
thermal vascular occlusion
Secure Device System
femoral vascular access

Authors

Michael Sacherer
Ewald Kolesnik
Friederike von Lewinski
Nicolas Verheyen
Karin Brandner
Markus Wallner
Deborah M. Eaton
Olev Luha
Robert Zweiker
Dirk von Lewinski

References (15)
  1. Walter J, Vogl M, Holderried M, et al. Manual Compression versus Vascular Closing Device for Closing Access Puncture Site in Femoral Left-Heart Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Comparison of Costs and Effects in Inpatient Care. Value Health. 2017; 20(6): 769–776.
  2. Hon LQ, Ganeshan A, Thomas SM, et al. An overview of vascular closure devices: what every radiologist should know. Eur J Radiol. 2010; 73(1): 181–190.
  3. Krishnasamy VP, Hagar MJ, Scher DJ, et al. Vascular closure devices: technical tips, complications, and management. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015; 18(2): 100–112.
  4. Davidson LJ, Luna J, Virmani R, et al. First human experience of thermal arterial closure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 84(1): 30–36.
  5. Schulz-Schüpke S, Helde S, Gewalt S, et al. Comparison of vascular closure devices vs manual compression after femoral artery puncture: the ISAR-CLOSURE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014; 312(19): 1981–1987.
  6. Holm NR, Sindberg B, Schou M, et al. Randomised comparison of manual compression and FemoSeal™ vascular closure device for closure after femoral artery access coronary angiography: the CLOSure dEvices Used in everyday Practice (CLOSE-UP) study. EuroIntervention. 2014; 10(2): 183–190.
  7. Koreny M, Riedmüller E, Nikfardjam M, et al. Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterization: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004; 291(3): 350–357.
  8. Nikolsky E, Mehran R, Halkin A, et al. Vascular complications associated with arteriotomy closure devices in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44(6): 1200–1209.
  9. Martin JL, Pratsos A, Magargee E, et al. A randomized trial comparing compression, Perclose Proglide and Angio-Seal VIP for arterial closure following percutaneous coronary intervention: the CAP trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008; 71(1): 1–5.
  10. Dong H, Peng M, Jiang X, et al. Endovascular therapy for Angio-seal-related acute limb ischemia: Perioperative and long-term results. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017; 89(S1): 609–615.
  11. Gargiulo NJ, Veith FJ, Ohki T, et al. Histologic and duplex comparison of the perclose and angio-seal percutaneous closure devices. Vascular. 2007; 15(1): 24–29.
  12. Kabelitz L, Nonn A, Nolte KW, et al. Long term outcome after application of the angio-seal vascular closure device in minipigs. PLoS One. 2016; 11(9): e0163878.
  13. Spiliopoulos S, Katsanos K, Karnabatidis D, et al. Safety and efficacy of the StarClose vascular closure device in more than 1000 consecutive peripheral angioplasty procedures. J Endovasc Ther. 2011; 18(3): 435–443.
  14. Minko P, Katoh M, Gräber S, et al. Obesity: an independent risk factor for insufficient hemostasis using the AngioSeal vascular closure device after antegrade puncture. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012; 35(4): 775–778.
  15. Schmelter C, Liebl A, Poullos N, et al. Suitability of Exoseal vascular closure device for antegrade femoral artery puncture site closure. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013; 36(3): 659–668.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl