Why the study?
To provide supplementary data and insight into the type and management of access complications related to the plug-based MANTA vascular closure device across various operator experience levels.
What are the types and management strategies of access complications related to the MANTA vascular closure device in patients undergoing large-bore cardiovascular interventions?
What are the types and management strategies of access complications related to the MANTA vascular closure device in patients undergoing large-bore cardiovascular interventions?
This patient-level pooled dataset provides comprehensive data for evaluating access complications, hemostasis times, and learning curve effects associated with the MANTA large-bore vascular closure device.
Facilitates clinician anticipation of MANTA complications in large-bore access; leaves open need for prospective validation before practice change.
This article provides supplementary tables and figures to the research article: Frequency, Impact and Predictors of Access Complications with Plug-Based Large-Bore Arteriotomy Closure - A patient level meta-analysis [1]. The data provide insight in the type and management of access complications related to the plug-based MANTA vascular closure device (VCD) for large-bore catheter-based cardiovascular interventions. Since MANTA is mostly used in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures, this article also contains a sub-group analysis on TAVR procedures using contemporary valve-platforms. Further, data describing MANTA hemostasis times and mortality causes are included. For this dataset, individual patient data were derived from a European and a North American device approval study (the Conformite Européene [CE] mark study and the investigational device exemption SAFE-MANTA study [2,3]) in addition to a post-approval registry (the MARVEL registry [4]) covering a total of 891 patients who were enrolled between 2015 and 2019 across 28 investigational sites. Eligibility criteria were most stringent in the SAFE MANTA study (38% of patients) whereas the MARVEL registry applied liberal and only relative exclusion criteria (56% of patients). A total of 78 Roll-in cases (i.e. first or second time operator use of the MANTA VCD) who were excluded from analysis in SAFE MANTA were included in the present to evaluate a potential learning curve effect. Therefore, this dataset reflects the largest study population undergoing arteriotomy closure with the MANTA VCD by operators at various levels of experience, which can be valuable to further build on research regarding percutaneous large-bore arteriotomy management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nuis et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: