Why the study?
Does a single ProGlide vascular preclose technique achieve equivalent technical success and procedural complications compared to a double ProGlide technique in patients undergoing TF-TAVI?
Does a single ProGlide vascular preclose technique achieve equivalent technical success and procedural complications compared to a double ProGlide technique in patients undergoing TF-TAVI?
Using a single ProGlide device for vascular closure in TF-TAVI appears to be as effective and safe as using two devices, potentially reducing procedural costs and complexity.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Single ProGlide may reduce costs in TF-TAVI; leaves open need for RCTs before practice change.
Vascular closure with a single ProGlide in TF-TAVI could achieve equivalent, acceptable rates of technical success and procedural complications compared with the double ProGlide technique.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kodama et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: