EFFECTIVENESS COMPARISON BETWEEN DOUBLE Perclose ProGlide CROSSING SUTURE AND TRADITIONAL SUTURE FOR CLOSURE OF PUNCTURE SITES IN ENDOVASCULAR AORTIC REPAIR_Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

Authors：

WEI Ren , XIONG Jiang , GUO Wei , LIU Xiaoping , ZHANG Hongpeng , JIA Xin.

Department of Vascular Surgery, General Hospital of Chinese PLA, Beijing, 100853, P.R.China. Corresponding author: GUO Wei, E-mail: pla301dml@vip.sina.com;

Corresponding author：

Keywords：

Endovascular aortic repair; Puncture point repair; Double Perclose ProGlide crossing suture; Traditional suture

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

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 gt; 0.05). Results The operation time, blood loss, and hospitalization days of double Perclose group were significantly better than those of traditional group (P lt; 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%, χ2=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 (χ2=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). Conclusion 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.

Citation： WEI Ren,XIONG Jiang,GUO Wei,LIU Xiaoping,ZHANG Hongpeng,JIA Xin.. EFFECTIVENESS COMPARISON BETWEEN DOUBLE Perclose ProGlide CROSSING SUTURE AND TRADITIONAL SUTURE FOR CLOSURE OF PUNCTURE SITES IN ENDOVASCULAR AORTIC REPAIR. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 2012, 26(8): 968-971. doi: Copy

1.	Ramponi F, Yan TD, Vallely MP, et al. Total percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass with Perclose ProGlide. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg, 2011, 13(1): 86-88.
2.	张宏鹏, 郭伟, 刘小平, 等. 完全穿刺技术在腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术中的应用. 中华外科杂志, 2010, 48(24): 1855-1858.
3.	Grenon SM, Gagnon J, Hsiang YN, et al. Canadian experience with percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair: short-term outcomes. Can J Surg, 2009, 52(5): E156-160.
4.	Lee WA, Brown MP, Nelson PR, et al. Total percutaneous access for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (“Preclose” technique). J Vasc Surg, 2007, 45(6): 1095-1101.
5.	Dosluoglu HH, Cherr GS, Harris LM, et al. Total percutaneous endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms using Perclose ProGlide closure devices. J Endovasc Ther, 2007, 14(2): 184-188.
6.	Starnes BW, Andersen CA, Ronsivalle JA, et al. Totally percutaneous aortic aneurysm repair: experience and prudence. J Vasc Surg, 2006, 43(2): 270-276.
7.	Georgiadis GS, Antoniou GA, Papaioakim M, et al. A meta-analysis of outcome after percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair using different size sheaths or endograft delivery systems. J Endovasc Ther, 2011, 18(4): 445-459.
8.	Quinn SF, Kim J. Percutaneous femoral closure following stent-graft placement: use of the Perclose device. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2004, 27(3): 231-236.
9.	Bent CL, Fotiadis N, Renfrew I, et al. Total percutaneous aortic repair: midterm outcomes. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2009, 32(3): 449-454.
10.	Jean-Baptiste E, Hassen-Khodja R, Haudebourg P, et al. Percutaneous closure devices for endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms: a prospective, non-randomized comparative study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2008, 35(4): 422-428.
11.	Teh LG, Sieunarine K, van Schie G, et al. Use of the percutaneous vascular surgery device for closure of femoral access sites during endovascular aneurysm repair: lessons from our experience. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2001, 22(5): 418-423.
12.	Lee WA, Brown MP, Nelson PR, et al. Midterm outcomes of femoral arteries after percutaneous endovascular aortic repair using the Preclose technique. J Vasc Surg, 2008, 47(5): 919-923.
13.	Al-Khatib WK, Zayed MA, Harris EJ, et al. Selective use of percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair in women leads to fewer groin complications. Ann Vasc Surg, 2012, 26(4): 476-482.
14.	Bangalore S, Arora N, Resnic FS. Vascular closure device failure: frequency and implications: a propensity-matched analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Interv, 2009, 2(6): 549-556.
15.	Morasch MD, Kibbe MR, Evans ME, et al. Percutaneous repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg, 2004, 40(1): 12-16.

1. Ramponi F, Yan TD, Vallely MP, et al. Total percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass with Perclose ProGlide. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg, 2011, 13(1): 86-88.
2. 张宏鹏, 郭伟, 刘小平, 等. 完全穿刺技术在腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术中的应用. 中华外科杂志, 2010, 48(24): 1855-1858.
3. Grenon SM, Gagnon J, Hsiang YN, et al. Canadian experience with percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair: short-term outcomes. Can J Surg, 2009, 52(5): E156-160.
4. Lee WA, Brown MP, Nelson PR, et al. Total percutaneous access for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (“Preclose” technique). J Vasc Surg, 2007, 45(6): 1095-1101.
5. Dosluoglu HH, Cherr GS, Harris LM, et al. Total percutaneous endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms using Perclose ProGlide closure devices. J Endovasc Ther, 2007, 14(2): 184-188.
6. Starnes BW, Andersen CA, Ronsivalle JA, et al. Totally percutaneous aortic aneurysm repair: experience and prudence. J Vasc Surg, 2006, 43(2): 270-276.
7. Georgiadis GS, Antoniou GA, Papaioakim M, et al. A meta-analysis of outcome after percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair using different size sheaths or endograft delivery systems. J Endovasc Ther, 2011, 18(4): 445-459.
8. Quinn SF, Kim J. Percutaneous femoral closure following stent-graft placement: use of the Perclose device. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2004, 27(3): 231-236.
9. Bent CL, Fotiadis N, Renfrew I, et al. Total percutaneous aortic repair: midterm outcomes. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2009, 32(3): 449-454.
10. Jean-Baptiste E, Hassen-Khodja R, Haudebourg P, et al. Percutaneous closure devices for endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms: a prospective, non-randomized comparative study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2008, 35(4): 422-428.
11. Teh LG, Sieunarine K, van Schie G, et al. Use of the percutaneous vascular surgery device for closure of femoral access sites during endovascular aneurysm repair: lessons from our experience. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2001, 22(5): 418-423.
12. Lee WA, Brown MP, Nelson PR, et al. Midterm outcomes of femoral arteries after percutaneous endovascular aortic repair using the Preclose technique. J Vasc Surg, 2008, 47(5): 919-923.
13. Al-Khatib WK, Zayed MA, Harris EJ, et al. Selective use of percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair in women leads to fewer groin complications. Ann Vasc Surg, 2012, 26(4): 476-482.
14. Bangalore S, Arora N, Resnic FS. Vascular closure device failure: frequency and implications: a propensity-matched analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Interv, 2009, 2(6): 549-556.
15. Morasch MD, Kibbe MR, Evans ME, et al. Percutaneous repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg, 2004, 40(1): 12-16.

Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

EFFECTIVENESS COMPARISON BETWEEN DOUBLE Perclose ProGlide CROSSING SUTURE AND TRADITIONAL SUTURE FOR CLOSURE OF PUNCTURE SITES IN ENDOVASCULAR AORTIC REPAIR

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Format

Content