title: [Effectiveness comparison between double Perclose ProGlide crossing suture and traditional suture for closure of puncture sites in endovascular aortic repair].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the advantages and disadvantages between double Perclose ProGlide crossing suture and traditional suture for the closure of 20F or 22F access points so as to provide a basis for selecting appropriate approach to repair the puncture points in endovascular aortic repair.
  
  
  METHODS
  Between June 2007 and May 2011, 103 patients (115 common femoral arteries) underwent endovascular aortic repair using sheaths of 20F or 22F (outer diameter); double Perclose ProGlide crossing suture was performed for closure of puncture sites in 57 cases (64 common femoral arteries) (double Perclose group) and traditional suture in 46 cases (51 common femoral arteries) (traditional group). There was no significant difference in age, gender, or disease duration between 2 groups (P > 0.05).
  
  
  RESULTS
  The operation time, blood loss, and hospitalization days of double Perclose group were significantly better than those of traditional group (P < 0.05). Ecchymoma in inguinal region and lymphatic leakage occurred in 5 cases (5 common femoral arteries) and 2 cases (2 common femoral arteries) of double Perclose group respectively, in 2 cases (2 common femoral arteries) and 6 cases (8 common femoral arteries) of traditional group respectively; no significant difference was found in the rate of the early complication between double Perclose group and traditional group (7.8% vs. 15.7%, chi2 = 1.76, P = 0.19). The technique success rate of double Perclose group was 96.9% (62/64), and was 100% (51/51) in traditional group, showing no significant difference (chi2 = 0.31, P = 0.50). All patients were followed up, 2-19 months (mean, 15 months) in double Perclose group and 2-18 months (mean, 14 months) in traditional group. Pseudoaneurysm occurred in the puncture region at 3 months in 1 case (1 common femoral artery) of double Perclose group, and incision and suture therapy was performed; no arteriostenosis or pseudoaneurysm occurred in other cases; and the rate of mid-term complication was 1.6% (1/64) in double Perclose group and was 0 in traditional group, showing no significant difference (P = 1.000).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Double Perclose ProGlide crossing suture has the same effectiveness to traditional surture in repairing the puncture point with 20F or 22F, but it is superior to traditional suture in reducing operation time, blood loss, and hospitalization days.
authors.affiliation: Department of Vascular Surgery, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing 100853, PR China.
authors.forename: Ren
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Wei
authors.forename: Jiang
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Xiong
authors.forename: Wei
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Guo
authors.forename: Xiaoping
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Liu
authors.forename: Hongpeng
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Zhang
authors.forename: Xin
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Jia
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000784:Aortic Dissection / Q000601:surgery; D001013:Aorta, Thoracic / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D001014:Aortic Aneurysm / Q000601:surgery*; D057510:Endovascular Procedures / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006488:Hemostasis, Surgical / Q000295:instrumentation; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology; D011677:Punctures / Q000009:adverse effects; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013536:Suture Techniques / Q000295:instrumentation*; D016896:Treatment Outcome