Use of vascular sealing devices (VasoSeal and Perclose) versus assisted manual compression (Femostop) in transcatheter coronary interventions requiring Abciximab (ReoPro)

Arteriotomy Closure Devices for Cardiovascular Procedures

“…In that small analysis, Vasoseal and Perclose showed comparable safety to FemoStop but achieved significantly lower initial rates of successful hemostasis (79% and 86% versus 100%, respectively). 57 Another retrospective, nonrandomized study of 827 ACDs (245 Angio-Seal and 582 suture-based) after PCI showed similar success and low and comparable vascular complication rates between the devices. 58 A larger retrospective analysis compared outcomes of 5892 uses of manual compression with 516 ACD uses (mostly Angio-Seal, nϭ371, and Techstar [suture-based], nϭ101) after diagnostic and PCI procedures.…”

Hemostatic Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Mechanical Compression Device for Femoral Arteriotomy

“…Successful delayed he- rates for the Femostop device are 1.9-13.9% (7,8,16). The complication rate in our study was comparable to that of previous compression devices and is acceptable according to recently published guidelines advising that the complication rate should be < 3% (1).…”

Current Developments in Percutaneous Arterial Closure Devices

“…External compression is largely unnecessary and patients can ambulate immediately. 20 Table VI summarizes the main attributes and potential problems in using Prostar XL and Closer devices. The principal disadvantage relates to the (reportedly) steep learning curve (high technical failure rate): as many as 30 to 40 procedures are required to achieve optimal technical proficiency.…”