Comparison of manual compression and vascular hemostasis devices after coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention through femoral artery access: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

被引:16
|
作者
Dahal, Khagendra [1 ]
Rijal, Jharendra [2 ]
Shahukhal, Ravi [3 ]
Sharma, Sharan [3 ]
Watti, Hussam [1 ]
Azrin, Michael [4 ]
Katikaneni, Pavan [1 ]
Jimenez, Enrique [5 ]
Tandon, Neeraj [5 ]
Modi, Kalgi [1 ]
Lee, Juyong [4 ]
机构
[1] Louisiana State Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Med, Div Cardiol, Shreveport, LA USA
[2] Brown Univ, Miriam Hosp, Alpert Sch, Div Cardiol,Dept Med, Providence, RI USA
[3] Univ New England, LRG Healthcare, Dept Med, Laconia, NH USA
[4] Univ Connecticut, Hlth Ctr, Calhoun Cardiol Ctr, Farmington, CT USA
[5] Overton Brooks Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Dept Cardiol, Shreveport, LA USA
关键词
Manual compression; Vascular hemostasis device; Time-to-hemostasis; Time-to-ambulation;
D O I
10.1016/j.carrev.2017.08.009
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of manual compression (MC) with vascular hemostasis devices (VHD) in patients undergoing coronary angiography (CA) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) through femoral artery access. Introduction: The use of femoral artery access for coronary procedures may result in access-related complications, prolonged immobility and discomfort for the patients. MC results in longer time-to-hemostasis (TTH) and time-to-ambulation (TTA) compared to VHDs but its role in access-related complications remains unclear in patients undergoing coronary procedures. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and relevant references for English language randomized controlled trials (RCT) from inception through September 30, 2016. We performed the meta-analysis using random effects model. The outcomes were time-to-hemostasis, time-to-ambulation, major bleeding, large hematoma >5 cm, pseudoaneurysm and other adverse events. Results: The electronic database search resulted in a total of 44 RCTs with a total of 18,802 patients for analysis. MC, compared to VHD resulted in longer TTH [mean difference (MD): 11.21 min; 95% confidence interval (CI) 8.13-14.29; P < 0.00001] and TTA [standardized mean difference: 1.2 (0.79-1.62); P < 0.00001] along with excess risk of hematoma >5 cm formation [risk ratio (RR): 1.38 (1.15-1.67); P = 0.0008]. MC resulted in similar risk of major bleeding [1.01 (0.64-1.60); P = 0.95] pseudoaneurysm [0.99 (0.75-1.29); P = 0.92], infections [0.52 (0.25-1.10); P = 0.09], need of surgery [0.60 (0.29-1.22); P = 0.16), AV fistula [0.93 (0.68-1.27); P = 0.63] and ipsilateral leg ischemia [0.95 (0.57-1.60); P = 0.86] compared to VHD. Conclusion: Manual compression increase time-to-hemostasis, time-to-ambulation and risk of hematoma formation compared vascular hemostasis devices. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:151 / 162
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION Radiation Exposure During Distal and Traditional Radial Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Cardoso, Cristiano de Oliveira
    Li, Ke
    Moctezuma-Ramirez, Angel
    Hanna, Franklin
    Ribeiro, Marcelo Harada
    Megaly, Michael S.
    Azzalini, Lorenzo
    Elgalad, Abdelmotagaly
    Perin, Emerson C.
    JOURNAL OF INVASIVE CARDIOLOGY, 2023, 35 (11):
  • [32] Traditional Versus Distal Radial Access for Coronary Angiography: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Barbarawi, Mahmoud
    Barbarawi, Owais
    Jailani, Mohamed
    Al-Abdouh, Ahmad
    Mhanna, Mahammed
    Robinson, Peter
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2023, 16 (04) : S44 - S45
  • [33] Traditional versus distal radial access for coronary angiography: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Barbarawi, Mahmoud
    Barbarawi, Owais
    Jailani, Mohamed
    Al-abdouh, Ahmad
    Mhanna, Mahammed
    Robinson, Peter
    CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE, 2023, 34 (04) : 274 - 280
  • [34] Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials
    Chiarito, M.
    Cao, D.
    Nicolas, J.
    Roumeliotis, A.
    Power, D.
    Chandiramani, R.
    Goel, R.
    Claessen, B. E.
    Ferrante, G.
    Stefanini, G. G.
    Mehran, R.
    Dangas, G.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2020, 41 : 2454 - 2454
  • [35] Femoral access management: comparison between two different vascular closure devices after percutaneous coronary intervention
    Legrand, V
    Doneux, P
    Martinez, C
    Gach, O
    Bellekens, M
    ACTA CARDIOLOGICA, 2005, 60 (05) : 482 - 488
  • [36] Clinical outcome comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention and bypass surgery in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies
    ChuanNan Zhai
    HongLiang Cong
    Kai Hou
    YueCheng Hu
    JingXia Zhang
    YingYi Zhang
    Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, 11
  • [37] Clinical outcome comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention and bypass surgery in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies
    Zhai, ChuanNan
    Cong, HongLiang
    Hou, Kai
    Hu, YueCheng
    Zhang, JingXia
    Zhang, YingYi
    DIABETOLOGY & METABOLIC SYNDROME, 2019, 11 (01):
  • [38] Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Hennessy, C.
    Henry, J. A.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 108 : 249 - 249
  • [39] Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on Effect of Cilostazol on Restenosis Rates and Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
    Friedland, Sayuri N.
    Eisenberg, Mark J.
    Shimony, Avi
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2012, 109 (10): : 1397 - 1404
  • [40] Percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft in left main coronary artery disease: a comprehensive meta-analysis of adjusted observational studies and randomized controlled trials
    Bertaina, Maurizio
    De Filippo, Ovidio
    Iannaccone, Mario
    Colombo, Antonio
    Stone, Gregg
    Serruys, Patrick
    Mancone, Massimo
    Omede, Pierluigi
    Conrotto, Federico
    Pennone, Mauro
    Kimura, Takeshi
    Kawamoto, Hiroyoshi
    Zoccai, Giuseppe Biondi
    Sheiban, Imad
    Templin, Christian
    Benedetto, Umberto
    Cavalcante, Rafael
    D'Amico, Maurizio
    Gaudino, Mario
    Moretti, Claudio
    Gaita, Fiorenzo
    D'Ascenzo, Fabrizio
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE, 2018, 19 (10) : 554 - 563