nach oben

Erschienen in:

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

15. Manuelle Hämostase und Verschlusssysteme

verfasst von : Prof. Dr. med. T. Jahnke, Prof. Dr. med. U. Teichgräber

Erschienen in: Periphere arterielle Interventionen

Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Zusammenfassung

Mit zunehmender Häufigkeit und Komplexität perkutaner Gefäßeingriffe nimmt die Bedeutung eines sicheren Managements der arteriellen Zugangswege zu. Die manuelle Kompression der Punktionsstelle gilt zwar vielerorts als Goldstandard, mit zunehmender Schleusengröße wird sie aber schwieriger und die Gefahr von Nachblutungen nimmt zu. Die Anwendung vaskulärer Gefäßverschlusssysteme (GVS) erhöht in dieser Situation die Sicherheit des arteriellen Zugangs, vereinfacht die Nachsorge und verkürzt die Immobilisationsphase. Das Kapitel gibt einen Überblick über aktuell verfügbare Gefäßverschlusssysteme und zeigt deren Vor- und Nachteile, Erfolgsraten sowie Komplikationsmöglichkeiten auf.

Ammann P, Brunner-La RoccaHP, Angehrn W et al. (2003) Procedural complications following diagnostic coronary angiography are related to the operator’s experience and the catheter size. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 59: 13–18 DOI: 10.1002/ccd.10489CrossRefPubMed

Applegate RJ, Grabarczyk MA, Little WC et al. (2002) Vascular closure devices in patients treated with anticoagulation and IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors during percutaneous revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol 40: 78–83CrossRefPubMed

Baker NC, Escarcega RO, Lipinski MJ, Magalhaes MA, Koifman E, Kiramijyan S, Negi SI, Torguson R, Waksman R (2016) Active Versus Passive Anchoring Vascular Closure Devices Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Safety and Efficacy Comparative Analysis. J Interv Cardiol. Jan 5. doi: 10.1111/joic.12264CrossRefPubMed

Balzer JO, Schwarz W, Thalhammer A et al. (2007) Postinterventional percutaneous closure of femoral artery access sites using the Clo-Sur PAD device: initial findings. Eur Radiol 17: 693–700CrossRefPubMed

Barbash IM, Barbanti M, Webb J, Molina-Martin De Nicolas J, Abramowitz Y, Latib A, Nguyen C, Deuschl F, Segev A, Sideris K, Buccheri S, Simonato M, Rosa FD, Tamburino C, Jilaihawi H, Miyazaki T, Himbert D, Schofer N, Guetta V, Bleiziffer S, Tchetche D, Immè S, Makkar RR, Vahanian A, Treede H, Lange R, Colombo A, Dvir D (2015) Comparison of vascular closure devices for access site closure after transfemoral aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J 36(47):3370–9CrossRefPubMed

Branzan D, Sixt S, Rastan A et al. (2009) Safety and efficacy of the StarClose vascular closure system using 7-F and 8-F sheath sizes: a consecutive single-center analysis. J Endovasc Ther 16: 475–482CrossRefPubMed

Burke MN, Hermiller J, Jaff MR (2012) StarClose vascular closure system (VCS) is safe and effective in patients who ambulate early following successful femoral artery access closure--results from the RISE clinical trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 80(1):45–52CrossRefPubMed

Chiu AH, Coles SR, Tibballs J et al. (2010) The StarClose vascular closure device in antegrade and retrograde punctures: a single-center experience. J Endovasc Ther 17: 46–50CrossRefPubMed

Chiu Wong S, Bachinsky W, Cambier P et al. for the ECLIPSE Trial Investigators (2009) A Randomized Comparison of a Novel Bioabsorbable Vascular Closure Device Versus Manual Compression in the Achievement of Hemostasis After Percutaneous Femoral Procedures The ECLIPSE (Ensure’s Vascular Closure Device Speeds Hemostasis Trial). J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2: 785–793

Cox T, Blair L, Huntington C, Lincourt A, Sing R, Heniford BT (2015) Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Manual Compression to Vascular Closure Devices for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Arterial Procedures Surg Technol Int 27:32–44

Doyle BJ, Godfrey MJ, Lennon RJ et al. (2007) Initial experience with the Cardiva Boomerang vascular closure device in diagnostic catheterization. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 69: 203–208CrossRefPubMed

Grandhi R, Zhang X, Panczykowski D, Choi P, Hunnicutt CT, Jadhav AP, Ducruet AF, Jovin T, Jankowitz B (2015) Incidence of delayed angiographic femoral artery complications using the EXOSEAL vascular closure device. Interv Neuroradiol 21(3):401–6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Gray BH, Miller R, Langan EM 3rd, Joels CS, Yasin Y, Kalbaugh CA (2009) The utility of the StarClose arterial closure device in patients with peripheral arterial disease. Ann Vasc Surg 23(3):341–4. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2008.07.009CrossRefPubMed

Gutzeit A, van Schie B, Schoch E, Hergan K, Graf N, Binkert CA (2012) Feasibility and safety of vascular closure devices in an antegrade approach to either the common femoral artery or the superficial femoral artery. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 35(5):1036–40CrossRefPubMed

Haas PC, Kracjer Z, Dietrich EB (1999) Closure of large percutaneous access sites using the Prostar XL percutaneous vascular surgery device. J Endovasc Surg 6: 168–170CrossRef

Hamid T, Choudhury TR, Clarke B, Mahadevan VS (2015) Pre-closure of Large-Sized Arterial Access Sites in Adults Undergoing Transcatheter Structural Interventions. Cardiol Ther 4(1):59–63CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Haulon S, Hassen Khodja R, Proudfoot CW et al. (2011) A systematic literature review of the efficacy and safety of the Prostar XL device for the closure of large femoral arterial access sites in patients undergoing percutaneous endovascular aortic procedures. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 41: 201–213

Hoffer EK, Bloch RD (2003) Percutaneous Arterial Closure Devices. J Vasc Interv Radiol 14: 865–885CrossRefPubMed

Jahnke T, Schäfer JP, Charalambous N et al. (2009) Total percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair with the dual 6-F Perclose-AT preclosing technique: a case-control study. J Vasc Interv Radiol 20: 1292–1298CrossRefPubMed

Juergens CP, Leung DY, Crozier JA et al. (2004) Patient tolerance and resource utilization associated with an arterial closure versus an external compression device after percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 63: 166–170CrossRefPubMed

Kamusella P, Wissgott C, Andresen R (2012) [Use of a percutaneous suture-mediated closure system after 6 - 8F transfemoral approaches: results for 2200 patients]. Rofo 184(4):311–5. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1299098CrossRef

Kamusella P, Wissgott C, Jahnke T, Brossmann J, Scheer F, Lüdtke CW, Andresen R (2015) Percutaneous Vascular Closure System Based on an Extravascular, Bioabsorbable Polyglycolic Plug (ExoSeal): Results from 1000 Patients. Clin Med Insights Cardiol 8(Suppl 2):49–52. doi: 10.4137/CMC.S15229CrossRef

Kara K, Mahabadi AA, Rothe H, Müller P, Krüger J, Neubauer H, Klein-Wiele O, Mügge A, Kahlert P, Erbel R (2014) Safety and effectiveness of a novel vascular closure device: a prospective study of the Exo Seal compared to the Angio-Seal and ProGlide. J Endovasc Ther 21(6):822–8CrossRefPubMed

Kiesz RS, Wiernek BK, Wiernek SL et al. (2011) Cardiva Catalyst II vascular access management device in percutaneous diagnostic and interventional procedures with same-day discharge (Catalyst II trial). J Endovasc Ther 18: 46–53CrossRefPubMed

Lardi AB, McKeever LS Wang MH et al. (1999) Use of vascular sealing devices (VasoSeal and Perclose) versus assisted manual compression (Femostop) in transcatheter coronary interventions requiring abciximab (ReoPro). Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 47: 143–147

Lee AW, Brown MP, Nelson PR et al. (2007) Total percutaneous access for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (»Preclose« technique). J Vasc Surg 45: 1095–1101CrossRefPubMed

Martin JL, Pratsos A, Magargee E et al. (2008) A randomized trial comparing compression, Perclose Proglide and Angio-Seal VIP for arterial closure following percutaneous coronary intervention: the CAP trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 71: 1–5CrossRef

Mlekusch W, Minar E, Dick P et al. (2008) Access site management after peripheral percutaneous transluminal procedures: Neptune pad compared with conventional manual compression. Radiology 249: 1058–1063CrossRefPubMed

Nikolsky E, Mehran R, Halkin A et al. (2004) Vascular complications associated with arteriotomy closure devices in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures: A meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 44: 1200–1209

Prayck JB, Wall TC, Longabaugh P et al. (1998) A randomized trial of vascular hemostasis techniques to reduce femoral vascular complications after coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol 81: 970–976

Reekers JA, Müller-Hülsbeck S, Libicher M et al. (2011) CIRSE vascular closure device registry. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 34: 50–53CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

RISE (nicht publiziert) A Clinical Evaluation of the StarClose™ Vascular Closure System, ClinicalTrials. gov identifier: NCT00736086

Schulz-Schüpke S, Helde S, Gewalt S, Ibrahim T, Linhardt M, Haas K, Hoppe K, Böttiger C, Groha P, Bradaric C, Schmidt R, Bott-Flügel L, Ott I, Goedel J, Byrne RA, Schneider S, Burgdorf C, Morath T, Kufner S, Joner M, Cassese S, Hoppmann P, Hengstenberg C, Pache J, Fusaro M, Massberg S, Mehilli J, Schunkert H, Laugwitz KL, Kastrati A; Instrumental Sealing of Arterial Puncture Site-CLOSURE Device vs Manual Compression (ISAR-CLOSURE) Trial Investigators (2014) Comparison of vascular closure devices vs manual compression after femoral artery puncture: the ISAR-CLOSURE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 312(19):1981–7CrossRefPubMed

Schwarz T, Rastan A, Pochert V et al. (2009) Mechanical compression versus haemostatic wound dressing after femoral artery sheath removal: a prospective, randomized study. Vasa 38: 53–59CrossRefPubMed

SEAL Trial Study Team (2002) Assessment of the safety and efficacy of the DUETT vascular hemostasis device: final results of the Safe and Effective Vascular Hemostasis (SEAL) trial. Am Heart J 143: 612–619

Spiliopoulos S, Katsanos K, Karnabatidis D et al. (2011) Safety and Efficacy of the StarClose Vascular Closure Device in More Than 1000 Consecutive Peripheral Angioplasty Procedures. J Endovasc Ther 18: 435–443CrossRefPubMed

Torsello G et al. (2003) Endovascular suture versus cutdown for endovascular aneurysm repair: a prospective randomized pilot study. J Vasc Surg 38: 78–82

Turi ZG (2008) An evidence-based approach to femoral arterial access and closure. Rev Cardiovasc Med 9: 7–18

Vaitkus PT (2004) A meta-analysis of percutaneous vascular closure devices after diagnostic catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention. J Invasive Cardiol 16: 243–246

van Dorp M, Ruyssers M, Amajoud Z, Lauwers P, Van Schil PE, Hendriks JM (2015) Preclose Percutaneous Endurant™ Endografting with the Proglide™ Device: a Safe and Feasible Combination. Acta Chir Belg 115(3):219–23

Titel: Manuelle Hämostase und Verschlusssysteme
verfasst von: Prof. Dr. med. T. Jahnke
Prof. Dr. med. U. Teichgräber
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Buch: Periphere arterielle Interventionen
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-55934-5

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-662-55935-2

Copyright-Jahr: 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-55935-2_15

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Chronische Unterbauch- und Viszeralschmerzen in der Praxis managen"

Springer Medizin

15. Manuelle Hämostase und Verschlusssysteme

Zusammenfassung

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Update Radiologie

Live-Webinar "Chronische Unterbauch- und Viszeralschmerzen in der Praxis managen"

Springer Medizin

Zusammenfassung

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Update Radiologie