Key result
Prostar-Plus device linked to ~13-fold higher major complications versus manual compression in diagnostic catheterizations.
Why the study?
Arterial puncture sites after cardiac catheterization cause complications, and the safety and efficacy of suture-mediated closure devices compared to manual compression needed evaluation.
Does a suture-mediated closure device improve safety and reduce complications compared to manual compression in patients undergoing diagnostic and interventional catheterizations?
Cohort (n=10,001)
Does a suture-mediated closure device improve safety and reduce complications compared to manual compression in patients undergoing diagnostic and interventional catheterizations?
The use of a suture-mediated closure device after diagnostic catheterization is associated with higher complication rates than manual compression, particularly in older, thinner women, though safety is comparable after interventional procedures.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Associated with higher complications in diagnostic cases; leaves open net benefit versus compression in interventional procedures.
Arterial puncture sites after cardiac catheterization are a troublesome cause of complications. Closure devices have been developed to improve on patient comfort and safety. We evaluated a suture-mediated closure device, the Prostar-Plus device, in a consecutive population of over 10,001 diagnostic and interventional catheterizations. A significantly higher complication rate was noted for both major and minor complications in the diagnostic catheterization patients treated with the Prostar-Plus device compared to diagnostic catheterization patients treated with manual compression (2.6% major and 4.6% minor complication rate for the Prostar-Plus treatment group vs. 0.2% major and 1.8% minor complication rate for the manual compression treatment group). For the interventional patients, there were no statistical differences noted for both major and minor complications between patients treated with the Prostar-Plus device vs. manual compression. Subgroup analysis showed that older, thinner women were more likely to have complications related to the Prostar-Plus device.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kahn et al. (2001) conducted a cohort in Cardiac catheterization (n=10,001). Prostar-Plus device vs. Manual compression was evaluated on Major complications (diagnostic catheterization). The Prostar-Plus device had significantly higher major (2.6% vs 0.2%) and minor (4.6% vs 1.8%) complication rates than manual compression in diagnostic catheterizations.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: