Techniques for managing complications of arterial closure devices.
According to data reported by the American Heart Association, more than 5 million diagnostic and therapeutic catheterizations are performed each year in the United States. The number of catheterizations has tripled since 1979. It has been estimated that complications related to the access site result in more than 75,000 surgical procedures annually. Thus, improved management of the access site itself is essential to achieve the greater goals of improved care and reduced cost. Manual compression directly over the site of arterial puncture usually results in adequate hemostasis but has several significant drawbacks. Manual compression is uncomfortable for the patient, is fatiguing and time-consuming for staff, and necessitates several hours of costly in-hospital observation. In addition, it may be ineffective in achieving hemostasis, especially in the setting of systemic anticoagulation or following the use of large-bore devices. Based on the perceived need for an improved method of managing the arterial access site following catheterization, various vascular sealing devices have been developed. There are at least 8 (and the number is increasing) hemostatic vascular closure devices that are currently approved by the FDA for access site closure after femoral arterial catheterization. The chief advantage attributed to vascular sealing devices is accelerated access site hemostasis, even in the setting of anticoagulation, leading to earlier ambulation and hospital discharge following arterial catheterization. The most important drawbacks related to vascular sealing devices include the cost of the devices and the possibility of increased access site complications. Despite the paucity of properly designed studies supporting their use, it is estimated that over one million vascular sealing devices are used annually in the United States, a number that has increased dramatically in the past 5 years.In this review, we present a brief description of the design and function of the most widely used devices, describe the most common mechanisms of failure, and recommend strategies for management of access site complications including hemorrhage, arterial obstruction, and infection.
Kalapatapu
Venkat R
VR
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA.
Ali
Ahsan T
AT
Masroor
Farzad
F
Moursi
Mohammed M
MM
Eidt
John F
JF
D017541:Aneurysm, False / Q000209:etiology / Q000601:surgery; D001157:Arterial Occlusive Diseases / Q000209:etiology / Q000601:surgery; D001164:Arteriovenous Fistula / Q000209:etiology / Q000601:surgery; D002404:Catheterization / Q000379:methods; D004867:Equipment Design; D004868:Equipment Failure; D006470:Hemorrhage / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control* / Q000601:surgery; D006489:Hemostatic Techniques / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000295:instrumentation; D006801:Humans; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D011677:Punctures / Q000009:adverse effects; D014656:Vascular Surgical Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D014946:Wound Infection / Q000209:etiology / Q000601:surgery