In:
Journal of Interventional Cardiology, Wiley, Vol. 31, No. 2 ( 2018-04), p. 223-229
Kurzfassung:
The aim of this study was to assess the impact of different access‐site closure strategies, suture or closure device (Proglide, Abbott Vascular), on vascular and bleeding complications after percutaneous mitral valve repair (MitraClip, Abbott Vascular). Background Considering the high‐risk profile in patients receiving percutaneous mitral valve repair, complications related to the large 24 Fr access sheath and its relation to the closure technique have not been evaluated so far. Methods and Results Between 2009 and 2015, 277 consecutive high‐risk patients with severe mitral valve regurgitation (MR) underwent percutaneous mitral valve repair at our institution using Z‐suture ( n = 150) or closure device ( n = 127) to close the access‐site. Duplex sonography was performed in all patients. The primary endpoint was access‐site related complications according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) criteria. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of bleeding complications and mortality. Access‐site related VARC2 major and minor complications were comparable after closure with Z‐suture or closure device (2,7% vs 3.1%, P = 0.81 and 15,3% vs 15.7%, P = 0.92). Three patients (2%) in the suture and four patients (3.1%) in the closure device group experienced unplanned endovascular intervention at the access site. Access‐site related major bleeding was observed in 4 (2.7%) suture and 4 (3.1%) closure device treated patients ( P = 0.81). No access site related mortality occurred. Conclusion Both Z‐suture and closure device use after percutaneous mitral valve repair are feasible and safe. However, there is no benefit of one strategy over the other according to VARC2 major and minor complications.
Materialart:
Online-Ressource
ISSN:
0896-4327
,
1540-8183
Sprache:
Englisch
Verlag:
Wiley
Publikationsdatum:
2018
ZDB Id:
2103585-4
