Vascular closure devices in patients treated with anticoagulation and IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors during percutaneous revascularization.
نویسندگان
چکیده
OBJECTIVES The study assessed clinical outcomes of closure device use following percutaneous coronary revascularization using current standards of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy. BACKGROUND Evaluation of the outcomes of patients by use of vascular closure devices during coronary interventions employing current standards of anticoagulation and glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitor therapy is limited. METHODS We evaluated outcomes of 4,525 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention between July 1997 and April 2000. All patients received anticoagulation with heparin and GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor therapy with abciximab. The closure method was manual in 1,824 patients, Angioseal in 524 patients and Perclose in 2,177 patients. Procedural and hospital vascular outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS Closure device success was 97.1% Angioseal and 94.1% Perclose (p < 0.05). Minor vascular complications occurred in 1.8% of manual patients, 1.1% of Angioseal patients and 1.2% of Perclose patients (p = NS); major complications occurred in 1.3% of manual patients, 1.1% of Angioseal patients and 1.0% of Perclose patients (p = NS). Multivariate logistic regression identified only closure device failure as an independent predictor of a vascular complication. In patients with successful closure with a device, minor complications (0.8% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.05) and any complication (1.5% vs. 2.5%, p < 0.05) were reduced compared to manual compression. CONCLUSIONS Arterial closure following coronary interventions using anticoagulation and GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor therapy can be safely and effectively performed, with vascular complication rates similar to or lower than with manual pressure. Additionally, vascular complication rates using GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor therapy regardless of the method of arterial closure are equivalent to or lower than previously published rates of vascular complications.
منابع مشابه
The TARGET trial: hit or miss?
Over the past 8 years large-scale, placebo-controlled trials have established the efficacy of intravenous platelet glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors at reducing the 30-day composite of death, myocardial infarction, and urgent target vessel revascularization associated with percutaneous coronary angioplasty, atherectomy, and stent placement. Using abciximab, tirofiban, or eptifibatide, each ...
متن کاملWho would I not give IIb/IIIa inhibitors to during percutaneous coronary intervention?
Coronary artery stenting and platelet IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists confer complementary benefits on patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Glycoprotein (Gp) IIb/IIIa inhibitors make the procedure safer by reducing periprocedural complications such as myocardial infarction, while stenting reduces restenosis rates and the need for further revascularisation procedures. If G...
متن کاملBleeding avoidance strategies during percutaneous coronary interventions.
Bleeding avoidance strategies for percutaneous coronary interventions continue to evolve with the availability of newer antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapies. Advances in interventional practices have altered the balance between ischemic and bleeding complications. With the availability of rapidly-acting platelet adenosine diphosphate-receptor antagonists, the need for routine glycoprotein...
متن کاملDetermining prognosis early after a myocardial infarction.
[1] Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F et al. A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 489–95. [2] Topol EJ, Leya F, Pinkerton CA et al. A comparison of directional atherectomy with coronary angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. The CAVEAT Study Group...
متن کاملAre stenting and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade of good value in primary percutaneous coronary intervention?
Therapy for ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) has undergone remarkable change over the past decade, and more evolution is doubtless in store. First, it has become relatively clear that primary angioplasty provides a real, if small, benefit over thrombolytic therapy.1 More recently, clinical trial data have shown that coronary stenting, initially thought to be unsafe in the thromb...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- Journal of the American College of Cardiology
دوره 40 1 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2002