StarClose血管闭合器封闭股动脉穿刺点的临床应用

目的 介绍使用StarClose血管闭合器的临床经验.方法 78例外周血管介入治疗患者术后使用StarClose血管闭合器闭合股动脉穿刺点,16例患者在同一穿刺部位多次使用闭合器,观察其止血成功率和血管并发症.2 min内完全停止渗血的病例,设定为止血成功,渗血时间超过2 min需要徒手压迫止血的病例,则设定为止血失败.结果 闭合器的平均操作时间为(30±10)s,平均止血时间为(12±11)s.止血成功率为96%,在同一穿刺部位多次使用闭合器的止血成功率为100%.所有止血成功患者术后2 h身体无需制动.无任何严重并发症.3例患者术后12 h发现穿刺点皮下少量渗血,轻微并发症的发生率为3.2%.结论 外周血管介入治疗患者术后使用StarClose血管闭合器可以安全、有效地闭合股动脉穿刺点,在同一穿刺部位可以多次使用StarClose血管闭合器.     

经股动脉介入术后穿刺点止血方法的现状和进展

股动脉路径是外周、颅内、颅外及冠状动脉介入治疗的常用途径,而穿刺点的围手术期血管并发症仍是每个介入医师时常面对的问题。股动脉介入术后穿刺点止血方法有手工压迫法、机械压迫法、血管闭合器止血等。自20世纪90年代中期以来,随着血管闭合器及各种机械压迫装置的广泛使用,一定程度缩短了术后卧床时间,提高了患者舒适度,但也带来了一些并发症。本文综述目前临床常用的止血方法和相关进展。     

Angioseal(R)血管闭合器在冠脉介入术后患者股动脉穿刺部位的应用

 目的 评价冠脉介入术后应用Angioseal血管闭合器封堵股动脉穿刺部位的安全性、可行性及临床实用性.方法 87例接受冠状动脉支架植入术的冠心病患者随机分为血管闭合器组(41例)和对照组(46例),分别采用Angioseal血管闭合器和传统徒手压迫方法止血.术后通过临床表现及血管彩色多普勒检查评估血管闭合器用于封堵股动脉穿刺部位的安全性、可行性及临床实用性.结果 2组间止血成功率无明显统计学意义(97.6% vs 100%,P＞0.05),血管并发症发生率无明显统计学意义(P＞0.05),但血管闭合器组平均止血时间较对照组明显缩短(P＜0.001),术后制动时间明显缩短(P＜0.001).结论 Angioseal血管闭合器用于临床封堵股动脉穿刺部位安全、可靠,有一定的临床实用性.     

不同血管缝合、闭合和封堵装置在神经介入术后股动脉穿刺止血中的临床应用对比研究

目的探讨不同血管缝合、闭合和封堵装置在神经介入术后股动脉穿刺止血中的疗效和并发症发生情况。方法回顾性分析2018年2月至2022年1月郑州大学第一附属医院放射介入科(郑东院区)神经介入术后采用Starclose血管闭合器、Angio-Seal和Exoseal血管封堵器及Perclose ProGlide血管缝合器进行股动脉穿刺部位止血的1 123例患者的临床资料, 按照装置止血方式不同将其分为闭合组(Starclose, n=271)、封堵组(Angio-Seal, n=327和Exoseal, n=352)和缝合组(ProGlide, n=173)。分析比较3类不同止血装置止血效果和并发症发生情况, 对可能影响并发症发生的相关因素进行logistic回归分析。结果 3类不同血管止血装置施行后均能够迅速止血, 止血成功率分别为闭合组(Starclose, 92.6%)、封堵组(Angio-Seal 93.0%和Exoseal 93.8%, 合计93.4%)和缝合组(ProGlide, 89.6%), 组间比较差异无统计学意义(χ2=3.026, P=0.388)。102例(9.1%)患...     

动脉穿刺止血方法的进展

动脉穿刺点的止血方法有手工压迫法、止血贴辅助压迫法、闭合器止血等.手工压迫法临床应用时间较长,但有其缺点.止血贴辅助压迫法仍需辅助以手工压迫.动脉穿刺闭合器(APCD)在临床应用10余年时间,其优点是缩短卧床时间,但也有并发症.本文就各种动脉穿刺止血方法的应用情况作一综述.     

Angio-Seal血管闭合器的临床应用

目的　观察Angio Seal血管闭合器的疗效及安全性。方法　行选择性冠脉介入诊疗的患者 114例,其中冠脉造影 53例,行PCI61例;男性 82例,女 32例,平均年龄 (63±10. 8 )岁 (32~85岁 )。在冠脉介入诊疗后行右股动脉造影,证实动脉穿刺处无粥样硬化斑块及大血管分支后,分定位、放锚、封堵动脉三步释放Angio Seal血管闭合器。结果　114例成功释放 113个,成功率为 99. 1%。主要并发症为出血,共有 7例发生穿刺处出血, 1例形成假性动脉瘤。未见患肢远端栓塞及全身过敏现象。结论　该方法操作简单、成功率高、止血迅速、疗效显著、卧床时间短,证明应用Angio Seal封堵动脉穿刺口是安全的,有推广应用的价值。     

血管缝合器在股动脉大口径穿刺入路闭合中的临床应用

【摘要】 血管缝合器(SMCD)是一类通过经皮装置在穿刺点周围置入缝线的血管闭合装置，可在经皮条件下达到最接近外科缝合的闭合效果。SMCD经皮闭合对于股动脉大口径穿刺入路的微创化具有重要意义。目前SMCD预置缝线技术是股动脉大口径穿刺入路闭合方式中应用最广泛的技术。现有研究评估了SMCD及预置缝线技术的优缺点，以及闭合失败的危险因素，同时提出术中和术后减少出血的辅助方法。术后如何安全有效地对大口径穿刺入路进行经皮闭合也已成为SMCD临床应用的重要课题。本文旨在总结SMCD在股动脉大口径穿刺入路闭合中的应用现状，为今后相关技术的发展提供思路。     

三种止血方法在冠状动脉介入诊疗术后的应用

目的 评价Pemlose和Angio-Seal血管闭合器在冠脉介入诊疗术后止血的安全性、有效性和临床应用价值.方法 根据术后止血方式,470例接受冠脉造影(CAG)或介入治疗(PCI)患者分为Perclose组(164例)、Angio-Seal组(143例)和手工压迫组(163例).冠脉诊疗术后Perclose组、Angio-Seal组经股动脉造影后,分别用Perclose血管缝合器、Angio-Seal血管封堵器封闭股动脉穿刺点;手T压迫组行单纯CAG后立即手工压迫股动脉止血,PCI术后4～6h手工压迫股动脉止血.Perc|ose组、Anglo-Seal组术前1～3d、术后3d用B超测量穿刺部位及附近3cm内股动脉或股浅动脉或股深动脉最小内径、收缩期血流峰速度、股动脉有无血栓.术后3～8个月进行电话或门诊随访有无不良反应.结果 Perclose组160例(97.6%)、Anglo-Seal组139例(97.2%)、手工压迫组163例(100%)止血成功,三组间比较无显著差异(P>0.05).Perclose组、Angio-Seal组各有4例血管封闭失败.Perclose组、Angio-Seal组止血、下肢制动时间显著短于手工压迫组(P＜0.001),外周血管并发症发生率显著低于手工压迫组(P＜0.05).Perclose组、AngioSeal组止血、下肢制动时间及并发症发生率无显著差异(P>0.05),术前、术后穿刺动脉最小内径及收缩期血流峰速度均无明显变化(P>0.05),均未见血栓,且术后3～8个月电话或门诊随访均无不良反应.结论 Perclose和Angio-Seal血管闭合器封闭股动脉穿刺点安全、有效,可能会减少外周血管并发症.     

血管封堵器与缝合器在冠脉介入检查和治疗中的效果观察

目的：观察比较血管封堵器与缝合器在冠脉介入检查和治疗中缝合股动脉止血的效果。方法：将冠脉介入检查和治疗后缝合股动脉病例648例，分为血管封堵器组376例与血管缝合器组272例，比较两组成功率和并发症发生率。结果：血管封堵器组成功率97．9％，血管缝合器组成功率97．8％。两组均无假性动脉瘤、血栓形成及栓塞等。结论：血管封堵器和血管缝合器均适用于冠脉介入检查和治疗后股动脉血管止血，成功率高，并发症发生率低，可缩短患者卧床时间。     

冠状动脉造影术后3种股动脉止血方法比较研究

目的：比较研究经股动脉冠状动脉造影术（PTCA）后3种股动脉止血方法的效果。方法：选择经股动脉行PTCA228例,随机分为3组,各76例。A组术后股动脉穿刺处应用血管缝合器止血,卧床2h开始下床活动;B组采用徒手压迫30min后,沙袋压迫8h、24h开始下床活动;C组采用徒手压迫30min后,压迫器压迫6h、24h开始下床活动。术后抗凝、抗血小板、降脂等其他常规处置相同。比较3组术后止血效果及并发症发生情况。结果：3组一次止血有效率比较,差异不显著（P〉0.05）;假性动脉瘤、尿潴留、淤血和腰痛等并发症发生率比较,A组显著低于其他两组（P〈0.05）。结论：虽然3组止血效果差异不显著,但应用血管缝合器止血能使患者卧床时间缩短,并发症减少。     

ExoSealTM血管封堵器在逆行经股动脉介入诊疗中的应用

目的 探讨血管封堵器ExoSealTM在逆行经股动脉介入诊疗中对穿刺点快速止血的安全性及有效性.方法 回顾性分析2016年3月至2016年4月收治的124例逆行经股动脉介入诊疗患者临床资料.诊疗术中分别采用ExoSealTM封堵器(n=52)和人工压迫(n=72)方法对股动脉穿刺点止血.记录并比较两组患者即刻止血时间、徒手压迫时间、制动时间、压迫过程出血量及操作后相关并发症.结果 ExoSealTM封堵组技术成功率为98.1％(51/52).ExoSealTM封堵组、人工压迫组即刻止血时间分别为(0.28±0.08) min、(5.83±1.46) min,徒手压迫时间分别为(2.65±0.57) min、(7.70±1.88)min,制动时间分别为(2.72±0.43)h、(6.15±0.69)h,差异均有显著统计学意义(P＜0.01).ExoSealTM封堵组发生皮下血肿1例,人工压迫组出现皮下血肿3例,假性动脉瘤1例,并发症发生率分别为1.92％ (1/52)、5.56％(4/72),差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).人工压迫组压迫过程出血量为(1.11±0.86) ml,明显低于ExoSealTM封堵组(7.83±2.08) ml,差异有显著统计学意义(P＜0.01).结论 逆行经股动脉介入术中采用ExoSealTM封堵器对股动脉穿刺点止血,安全有效.     

Angio-Seal血管封堵器在脑血管病介入诊治中的应用

目的 评价Angio-Seal血管封堵器在脑血管病介入诊治术中应用效果及安全性.方法 359例脑血管病患者在完成介入诊治术、复查右股动脉DSA证实动脉穿刺处无粥样硬化斑块及大血管分支后,其股动脉穿刺点接受Angio-Seal血管封堵器止血.结果 359例患者中358例封堵止血成功,成功率为99.2％.1例封堵失败,穿刺处出血,予以手法压迫止血;2例术后3d活动时出现血肿,再次加压包扎等处理后好转.未见患肢远端栓塞及全身过敏现象.结论 应用Angio-Seal血管封堵器封堵股动脉穿刺点安全有效,操作方法简单,成功率高,患者卧床时间短,有推广应用价值.     

Inadvertent Arterial Placement of Central Venous Catheters: Systematic Review and Guidelines for Treatment

Inadvertent arterial placement of central venous catheters carries serious sequelae, including pseudoaneurysm development and stroke. Although numerous strategies for therapeutic repair after arterial injury have been employed, no treatment provides a definitive standard of care. All articles published between January 2000 and July 2018 involving the placement of central venous catheters in the brachiocephalic or subclavian arteries, carotid artery, vertebral artery, and aortic arch and subsequent treatment were systematically reviewed. Arterial repair consisted of manual pressure, endovascular techniques (balloon tamponade, percutaneous closure devices, and covered stent placement), and open surgery. Success rates favored endovascular techniques and surgery over manual compression.     

StarClose Vascular Closure Device: Prospective Study on 222 Deployments in an Interventional Radiology Practice

The StarClose device (Abbott Vascular Devices; Abbott Laboratories, Redwood City, CA) utilizes an externally placed Nitinol clip to achieve arterial closure following femoral artery puncture. The objectives of this study were to assess the efficacy and complications of the StarClose device in patients undergoing interventional radiological procedures. Preprocedural clotting status, pulse and blood pressure, severity of vessel calcification, sheath size, and time to deployment were recorded. Postdeployment complications immediately postprocedure, at 1 h, at 2 h, and at 1 week were recorded. A duplex scan was performed in the first 10 patients to assess any immediate vascular complications. Deployments were successful in 96% achieving immediate hemostasis. Mean deployment time was 48 s. There were no major complications. The StarClose device was found to have a high technical and clinical efficacy.     

Femoral Artery Stenosis Following Percutaneous Closure Using a Starclose Closure Device

Starclose (Abbott Vascular Devices, Redwood City, CA) is a new arterial closure device that seals a femoral puncture site with an extravascular star-shaped nitinol clip. The clip projects small tines into the arterial wall which fold inward, causing the arterial wall to pucker, producing a purse-string-like seal closing the puncture site. The case history is that of a 76-year-old female patient who underwent day-case percutaneous diagnostic coronary angiography. A Starclose femoral artery closure device was used to achieve hemostasis with subsequent femoral artery stenosis.     

Successful Angioplasty of a Superficial Femoral Artery Stenosis Caused by a Suture-Mediated Closure Device

We report the successful angioplasty of an acute arterial narrowing after suture-mediated closure (SMC) of a femoral arterial puncture. A 75-year-old woman underwent a cerebral arteriogram via a right common femoral artery puncture. The arteriotomy site was closed with a SMC device. Four days after placement the patient complained of pain in her right calf after walking. An arteriogram 7 days after SMC showed a severe focal stenosis at the origin of the superficial femoral artery involving the presumed puncture site. The lesion was successfully treated with balloon angioplasty. The patient at 6 months was asymptomatic.     

The Inflammatory Response to Femoral Arterial Closure Devices: A Randomized Comparison Among FemoStop,AngioSeal, and Perclose

The objectives of this study were to investigate whether the systemic inflammatory response differs, in patients undergoing coronary angiography, among the arterial closure devices FemoStop, AngioSeal, and Perclose. The study is a prospective and randomized study. We measured pre- and postprocedural C-reactive protein (CRP), fibrinogen, and interleukin-6 (IL-6) plasma levels and collected clinical and procedural data on 77 patients who underwent coronary angiography because of stable angina pectoris. Patients were randomized to the following device: FemoStop (mechanical compression), AngioSeal (anchor and collagen sponge), or Perclose (nonabsorbable suture). No patient group experienced an increased incidence of vascular complications. There were no differences among the three groups regarding CRP, fibrinogen, or IL-6 values before or after coronary angiography. IL-6 levels increased 6 h after the procedure in all groups (p < 0.01), however, the increase did not differ among the groups. After 30 days there were no increased values of CRP or fibrinogen. We conclude that the femoral arterial closure devices AngioSeal and Perclose do not enhance an inflammatory response after a diagnostic coronary angiography, measured by CRP, fibrinogen, and IL-6, compared to femoral arterial closure using a mechanical compression device.     

Prospective Nonrandomized Trial of Manual Compression and Angio-Seal and Starclose Arterial Closure Devices in Common Femoral Punctures

We compared the use of manual compression and Angio-Seal and Starclose arterial closure devices to achieve hemostasis following common femoral artery (CFA) punctures in order to evaluate safety and efficacy. A prospective nonrandomized, single-center study was carried out on all patients undergoing CFA punctures over 1 year. Hemostasis was achieved using manual compression in 108 cases, Angio-Seal in 167 cases, and Starclose in 151 cases. Device-failure rates were low and not significantly different in the two groups (manual compression and closure devices; p = 0.8). There were significantly more Starclose (11.9%) patients compared to Angio-Seal (2.4%), with successful initial deployment subsequently requiring additional manual compression to achieve hemostasis (p < 0.0001). A significant number of very thin patients failed to achieve hemostasis (p = 0.014). Major complications were seen in 2.9% of Angio-Seal, 1.9% of Starclose, and 3.7% of manual compression patients, with no significant difference demonstrated; 4.7% of the major complications were seen in female patients compared to 1.3% in males (p = 0.0415). All three methods showed comparable safety and efficacy. Very thin patients are more likely to have failed hemostasis with the Starclose device, although this did not translate into an increased complication rate. There is a significant increased risk of major puncture-site complications in women with peripheral vascular disease.