Suture-mediated vascular closure devices reduced hospital stay by 3.7 hours, procedure time by 10 minutes for first-time ablations, and post-procedure bed rest by 4 hours compared to manual compression in adults undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.
Observational (n=159)
No
Does the use of vascular closure devices reduce hospitalisation duration and improve patient experience compared to manual compression in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation?
Implementing vascular closure devices after atrial fibrillation ablation significantly reduces hospital stay, procedure time, and patient pain without increasing complications or overall healthcare costs.
Effect estimate: Median hospitalisation duration reduced by 3.7 hours
Absolute Event Rate: 7.9% vs 11.6%
p-value: p=<0.001
CDs improve care pathways after atrial fibrillation ablation by reducing hospitalisation time, enhancing patient comfort, and improving workflow efficiency without increasing complications.
Scheurwater et al. (Tue,) conducted a observational in Adults (mean age ~65 years) undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation with ultrasound-guided femoral vein access and uninterrupted anticoagulation (n=159). Suture-mediated vascular closure devices (Perclose ProGlide) vs. Manual compression with pressure bandaging and bed rest was evaluated on Hospitalisation duration, procedure time, post-procedure bed rest, unplanned overnight stays, pain medication use, and patient pain scores as primary endpoints (Median hospitalisation duration reduced by 3.7 hours, p=<0.001). Suture-mediated vascular closure devices reduced hospital stay by 3.7 hours, procedure time by 10 minutes for first-time ablations, and post-procedure bed rest by 4 hours compared to manual compression in adults undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.