title: Safety and Efficacy of the Prostar XL Vascular Closing Device for Percutaneous Closure of Large Arterial Access Sites.
abstract: Purpose. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Prostar XL device for percutaneous large access site closure in an unselected patient and operator collective. Materials and Methods. All patients (n = 50) who had received percutaneous vascular closing with the Prostar XL device in our institution with follow-up data of at least 6 months were retrospectively included. Primary (freedom from surgical conversion) and continued (freedom from groin surgery in further course) technical success and major (deviations from expected outcome requiring surgery) and minor (other deviations from expected outcome) complications were assessed. Success and complications rates were correlated with delivery system size (Mann-Whitney Rank Sum Tests) and operator experience (paired samples t-test). Results. Rates of primary and continued technical success as well as major and minor complications were 93.6%, 89.7%, 10.3%, and 10.3% (groin based) and 90.0%, 84.0%, 16.0%, and 16.0% (patient based), respectively. No correlation of success and complications rate was found with delivery system sizes and operator experience. Conclusions. Application of the Prostar XL device for percutaneous closure of large arterial access sites is safe with a relatively high rate of technical success and low rate of major complications. Sizes of the delivery systems and the experience of the operator did not influence the results.
authors: Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, University of Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Straße 3, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.
authors: Christoph
authors: C
authors: Thomas
authors: Volker
authors: V
authors: Steger
authors: Stefan
authors: S
authors: Heller
authors: Martin
authors: M
authors: Heuschmid
authors: Dominik
authors: D
authors: Ketelsen
authors: Claus D
authors: CD
authors: Claussen
authors: Klaus
authors: K
authors: Brechtel
references: J Vasc Surg. 2004 Jul;40(1):12-6
references: 15218455
references: J Vasc Surg. 2003 Jul;38(1):78-82
references: 12844093
references: J Vasc Surg. 2006 Feb;43(2):270-6
references: 16476600
references: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2004 May-Jun;27(3):231-6
references: 15037951
references: Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther. 2009 Mar;21(1):29-33
references: 19364727
references: J Endovasc Surg. 1999 May;6(2):168-70
references: 10473335
references: J Vasc Surg. 2000 Oct;32(4):770-6
references: 11013041
references: J Endovasc Ther. 2009 Dec;16(6):708-13
references: 19995109
references: J Vasc Surg. 2007 Jun;45(6):1095-101
references: 17398056
references: J Invasive Cardiol. 2003 May;15(5):251-6
references: 12730632
references: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011 Jul 1;78(1):119-24
references: 21681898
references: J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2011 Oct;52(5):651-9
references: 21796092
references: J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009 Oct;20(10):1292-8
references: 19695904
references: J Endovasc Ther. 2007 Apr;14(2):184-8
references: 17484534
references: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2009 May;32(3):449-54
references: 19296162
references: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011 Feb;41(2):201-13
references: 21144777
references: J Endovasc Ther. 2001 Feb;8(1):68-74
references: 11220473
references: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2001 Nov;22(5):418-23
references: 11735179
references: Int J Cardiol. 2008 Nov 12;130(2):251-4
references: 18234376
references: J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011 Feb;22(2):142-7
references: 21194966
references: N Engl J Med. 2010 May 20;362(20):1863-71
references: 20382983