News | Vascular Closure Devices | November 09, 2021

Plug-based Vascular Closure Following TAVR Offers Shorter Hemostasis Time Than Suture-based Devices

But results from the CHOICE-CLOSURE Trial also show plug-based systems have more vascular complications

The Teleflex Manta large bore vascular closure device #TCT2021

The Teleflex Manta large bore vascular closure device.


November 9, 2021 — Results from the largest randomized trial available comparing different closure device strategies following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) found that a plug-based vascular closure technique had a shorter time to hemostasis, but a higher rate of access-site or access-related vascular complications.

Findings were reported at the 2021 Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics (TCT) annual scientific symposium of the Cardiovascular Research Foundation (CRF). The study was also published simultaneously in Circulation.[1]

TAVR is commonly used for elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, vascular complications after transfemoral TAVR contribute significantly to morbidity and mortality and are commonly related to the arterial access site. Several approved percutaneous vascular closure device (VCD) strategies are available and are being used interchangeably in routine clinical practice.

The CHOICE-CLOSURE trial was an investigator-initiated, multicenter trial that randomized patients with severe symptomatic AS and acceptable transfemoral vascular access to either the pure plug-based MANTA VCD technique or the primary suture-based ProGlide technique. Between June 2020 and June 2021, 516 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR were enrolled and randomized 1:1 at three German centers. The plug-based strategy was used in 258 patients and 258 patients received the suture-based vascular closure strategy.

The primary endpoint was the rate of access-site or access-related vascular complications according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 definition during index hospitalization. The event rate for the plug-based technique was 19.4% compared to 12.0% in the suture-based technique (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.07-2.44, p=0.029). Secondary endpoints included device failure, time to hemostasis and access-site related bleeding at 30 days. Time to hemostasis was lower with the plug-based technique (80 seconds versus 240 seconds, p<0.001). The 30-day outcomes for access-site or access-related vascular complications, access-site or access-related bleeding and/or VCD failure was 19.8% for the plug-based group compared to 12.8% for the suture-based group (p=0.043).

“With the introduction of large-bore plug-based devices, operators now have an alternative to the classical suture-based technique,” said Mohamed Abdel-Wahab, M.D., Ph.D., professor of interventional cardiology, consultant cardiology and head of department of structural heart disease at the Heart Center Leipzig, University of Leipzig. “However, randomized comparisons of these technique are scarce. Results from CHOICE-CLOSURE indicate that both techniques have infrequent severe complications, with low and comparable mortality and life-threatening bleeding rates. While associated with a shorter time to hemostasis, the plug-based technique did have a significantly higher rate of access-site or access-related vascular complications.”

The study was funded by Helios Kliniken GmbH. Prof. Abdel-Wahab reported consulting fees/honoraria from Boston Scientific and Medtronic

Links to All the TCT 2021 Late-Breaking Clinical Trials

 

Reference:
1. Mohamed Abdel-Wahab, Philipp Hartung, Oliver Dumpies,, et al. Comparison of a Pure Plug-Based versus a Primary Suture-Based Vascular Closure Device Strategy for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: The CHOICE-CLOSURE Randomized Clinical Trial. Circulation. Originally published 5 Nov. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.057856Circulation. 2021;0
 

 


Related Content

News | Vascular Closure Devices

April 16, 2024 — Vivasure Medical, a company pioneering novel fully absorbable technology for percutaneous vessel ...

Home April 16, 2024
Home
News | Vascular Closure Devices

September 16, 2022 — Teleflex Incorporated, a leading global provider of medical technologies, announced that Dr. Magnus ...

Home September 16, 2022
Home
News | Vascular Closure Devices

July 15, 2021 — Vivasure Medical announced its development program for PerQseal Blue, a sutureless and fully ...

Home July 15, 2021
Home
News | Vascular Closure Devices

August 17, 2020 — Veryan Medical announced it will support Vasorum in the commercialization of the Celt atrial closure ...

Home August 17, 2020
Home
Videos | Vascular Closure Devices

Ashish Pershad, M.D., chief of interventional cardiology, Banner University Medical Center, Phoenix, explains the trend ...

Home October 17, 2019
Home
Technology | Vascular Closure Devices

April 3, 2019 — Essential Medical Inc. received U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearance for its large bore ...

Home April 03, 2019
Home
Technology | Vascular Closure Devices

December 20, 2018 — Cardiva Medical Inc. announced the company has received premarket approval (PMA) from the U.S. Food ...

Home December 20, 2018
Home
News | Vascular Closure Devices

November 21, 2018 – Vivasure Medical Ltd. recently announced the European launch of the PerQseal closure device for ...

Home November 21, 2018
Home
News | Vascular Closure Devices

November 12, 2018 — The Vascade MVP vascular closure system met its endpoints compared to manual compression in a ...

Home November 11, 2018
Home
Technology | Vascular Closure Devices

November 2, 2018 — Cordis, a Cardinal Health company, today announced the U.S. launch of Mynx Control Vascular Closure ...

Home November 05, 2018
Home
Subscribe Now