A propensity-matched comparison of plug- versus suture-based vascular closure after TAVI

David Grundmann, Won Kim, Caroline Kellner, Matti Adam, Daniel Braun, Alexander R. Tamm, Max Meertens, Christian W. Hamm, Sabine Bleiziffer, Jonas Gmeiner, Alexander Sedaghat, David Leistner, Matthias Renker, Hendrik Wienemann, Efstratios Charitos, Marie Linnemann, Tobias Lerchner, Benjamin Juri, Mostafa Salem, Roman Benetti-LehmannHenryk Dreger, Alina Goßling, Awesta Nahif, Lenard Conradi, Niklas Schofer, Andreas Schäfer, Jasmin Popara, Misumasa Sudo, Smita Scholtz, Ralph Stephan von Bardeleben, Marc Vorpahl, Derk Frank, Tanja K. Rudolph, Moritz Seiffert

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Vascular access site complications are associated with increased morbidity and mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Current results comparing strategies with plug- (P-VCD; MANTA) and suture-based vascular closure devices (S-VCD; Perclose ProGlide) remain inconsistent. AIMS: It was our aim to assess the incidence of access-related vascular complications after P-VCD or S-VCD strategies after transfemoral TAVI. METHODS: The Plug or sUture based vascuLar cloSurE after TAVI (PULSE) registry retrospectively evaluated 10,120 consecutive patients who had undergone transfemoral TAVI at 10 centres from 2016 to 2021. A propensity score was used to match 900 P-VCD patients with 1,800 S-VCD patients in a 1:2 fashion. The primary outcome measures were major and minor access-related vascular complications at the primary access site, adjudicated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 definitions. RESULTS: The median age was 81.8 years, 46.4% of patients were female, and the median European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II was 3.50%. In matched P-VCD and S-VCD groups, large-bore access-related complications occurred in 14.9% vs 10.3% (p<0.001; major: 3.6% vs 4.6%; p=0.218; minor: 11.3% vs 5.8%; p<0.001) of patients. Bleeding accounted for most of these complications (9.6% vs 7.2%; p=0.028) and was treated with endovascular balloon inflation (5.4% vs 2.6%; p<0.001), stent implantation (4.7% vs 0.7%; p<0.001) or surgical repair (0.7% vs 1.7%; p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: P-VCD were associated with higher rates of primary access-related vascular complications, driven by minor complications, compared to S-VCD. Endovascular treatment was more common after P-VCD failure.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e272-e281
JournalEuroIntervention
Volume21
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2025
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • closure
  • plug
  • suture
  • TAVI
  • vascular
  • VCD

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A propensity-matched comparison of plug- versus suture-based vascular closure after TAVI'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this