title: To plug or not to plug?
abstract: Coronary artery disease remains a common problem in industrialized countries. Percutaneous coronary interventions are usually performed utilizing the femoral approach. Arterial puncture-closing devices have been developed in hope to avoid manual compression and shortening the period of rest. In a recent meta-analysis in the Journal of the American Medical Association these devices have shown only marginal benefits over manual compression. Further, well designed studies are necessary to document the comparative effects of these devices versus manual compression.
authors.affiliation: The University of Texas Health Science Center, St Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA. Joseph.Varon@uth.tmc.edu
authors.forename: Joseph
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Varon
authors.forename: Robert E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Fromm
mesh_terms: D015906:Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary / Q000009:adverse effects*; D001458:Bandages; D006328:Cardiac Catheterization / Q000009:adverse effects*; D003324:Coronary Artery Disease / Q000628:therapy*; D005263:Femoral Artery; D006406:Hematoma / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D006489:Hemostatic Techniques / Q000295:instrumentation*; D006801:Humans; D015201:Meta-Analysis as Topic; D019106:Postoperative Hemorrhage / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D011312:Pressure; D011677:Punctures; D014945:Wound Healing