Failure of Vascular Closure Devices Is Associated with Increased Vascular Complication Rates

Findings from a single-center study clarify the risks of VCD use and suggest that collagen plug–based devices might be better than suture-based devices.

Compared with manual compression, the use of a vascular closure device (VCD) after femoral artery access for cardiac catheterization can reduce the time to hemostasis and improve patient mobilization and satisfaction. However, the data on the efficacy and safety of VCDs are conflicting. In this large, prospective, single-center registry study, investigators examined and compared in-hospital outcomes after deployment of 8164 collagen plug–based and 1659 suture-based VCDs.

VCD failure (unsuccessful deployment or failure to achieve hemostasis) occurred in 2.7% of patients overall. Compared with patients with successful VCD placement, those with VCD failure were older and more likely to have diabetes or peripheral arterial disease, to be undergo…

Reviewing Author

Howard C. Herrmann, MD

Disclosures

Consultant/Advisory BoardAffluent Medical; Artedrone; Caranx; Johnson & Johnson; Medtronic; Prolifagen; Wells Fargo

EquityMicrointerventional Devices, Inc.

RoyaltiesUniversity of Pennsylvania

Grant/Research SupportAbbott Vascular; Edwards Lifesciences; Johnson & Johnson; Medtronic

Editorial BoardsCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions; Journal of the American College of Cardiology; Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions; JACC Cardiovascular Interventions; JACC Case Reports; JSCAI