Managing Unintentional Iatrogenic Triple Lumen Central Venous Catheter (TLCVC) Arterial Puncture

Unintentional arterial puncture by central venous catheter insertion/placing can result in destructive complications especially if a large bore (>7F) catheter was used. Unplanned immediate catheter ejection with manual external compression is hazardous due to potential torrential blood leakage or formation of a pseudoaneurysm. Endovascular removal with a vascular closure device deployment is preferred in this situation. The aim of this case report is to discuss the alternative strategies if the vascular closure device fails to secure hemostasis.

Safety and efficacy of the Mynx Control vascular closure device in peripheral arterial procedures: A prospective study

Objectives This article aims to present a prospective study investigating the safety and efficacy of the Mynx Control extravascular closure device (Cordis Corporation, FL, USA), for femoral arterial closure in patients undergoing peripheral arterial procedures. Methods Between January 2020 and February 2021, 100 Mynx Control devices were deployed in 91 consecutive patients (mean age: 67.5 ± 16.9 years) who underwent peripheral arterial procedures. We used ultrasound and/or fluoroscopy during Mynx Control deployment and ultrasound post-procedure to detect complications. Femoral artery punctures included 62 (62%) antegrade and 38 (38%) retrograde punctures. The mean activated clotting time at time of device deployment was 221s. The primary endpoints were technical success, device failure, and complication rates up to 30 days. Results A 5F vascular sheath was used in 43 cases (43%) (36 (36%) 6F and 21 (21%) 7F). The majority of our cases had antegrade access (62%). Overall technical success rate was 97% in both antegrade and retrograde cases. In total, there were 4 minor complications: 3 (3%) cases of pseudoaneurysm and 1 (1%) case of haematoma. No major complications were recorded post-procedure or 30 days post index procedure. Conclusion The Mynx Control vascular closure device is safe and effective in achieving haemostasis in patients undergoing antegrade and retrograde peripheral angioplasty procedures.

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

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established treatment option for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS), and is most commonly performed through the transfemoral access route. Percutaneous access site closure can be achieved using dedicated plug-based or suture-based vascular closure device (VCD) strategies, but randomized comparative studies are scarce. Methods: The CHOICE-CLOSURE (Randomized Comparison of CatHeter-based Strategies fOr Interventional ACcess SitE CLOSURE during Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial is an investigator-initiated, multicenter study, in which patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR were randomly assigned to vascular access site closure using either a pure plug-based technique (MANTA, Teleflex, Wayne, Pennsylvania) with no additional VCDs or a primary suture-based technique (ProGlide, Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, Illinois) potentially complemented by a small-plug. The primary endpoint consisted of access-site or access-related major and minor vascular complications during index hospitalization, defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria. Secondary endpoints included the rate of access-site or access-related bleeding, VCD failure, and time to hemostasis Results: A total of 516 patients were included and randomized. The mean age of the study population was 80.5±6.1 years, 55.4% were male, 7.6% of patients had peripheral vascular disease, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 4.1±2.9%. The primary endpoint occurred in 19.4% (50/258) of the pure plug-based group and 12.0% (31/258) of the primary suture-based group (relative risk [RR]: 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-2.44, p=0.029). Access-site or access-related bleeding occurred in 11.6% vs. 7.4% (RR: 1.58, 95%CI: 0.91-2.73, p=0.133) and device failure in 4.7% vs. 5.4% (RR: 0.86, 95%CI: 0.40-1.82, p=0.841) in the respective groups. Time to hemostasis was significantly shorter in the pure plug-based group (80 [32, 180] vs. 240 [174, 316] seconds, p<0.001). Conclusions: Among patients treated with transfemoral TAVR, a pure plug-based vascular closure technique using the MANTA VCD is associated with a higher rate of access-site or access-related vascular complications but a shorter time to hemostasis compared to a primary suture-based technique using the ProGlide VCD.

Feasibility and Safety of an 8 F Angioseal® Vascular Closure Device for Closure of Large Bore Impella CP® Access

Purpose: Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS) with the Impella® device is routinely used in cardiogenic shock and high risk percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). However, safety and feasibility to close the large bore access (LBA) post-hoc remain a challenge. Materials and Methods: In patients with planned termination of Impella therapy, corresponding LBA closure was attempted using an undersized AngioSeal® device, which was deployed after insertion of a 0.035 in J-wire through the guidewire access port. Cross-over angiographic visualization before and after deployment as well as in-hospital follow up were performed to assess closure success and screening for short-term adverse events. Results: We evaluated 17 patients (68 year old, IQR 58–76, 71% male) in whom 14 F LBA closure after pMCS using the Impella CP® was achieved with an undersized AngioSeal® device. Clinical indication for pMCS was cardiogenic shock in 94% and protected PCI in 6%. Impella CP® devices were withdrawn after a median of 4 days (IQR 3–6 days). Primary hemostasis was achieved in the majority of patients (14/17; 82%) while single cross-over balloon inflation led to hemostasis in the remaining patients. One patient suffered acute ischemia later in the course of the disease, but this was not directly related to the closure device. In this study, no major bleeding or other device-related adverse events were observed. Conclusion: The 8 F AngioSeal® vascular closure device has been safely used for removal of the Impella CP® microaxial pump in most cases of predominantly normal weight patients. This technique may be considered feasible for post-hoc LBA closure in the context of pMCS, especially when preclosure options are not suitable or unavailable.

AbsorbaSeal™ 5.6.7F vascular closure device: A good laboratory practice chronic study evaluating safety and efficacy in a healthy porcine model

Objectives Vascular closure devices (VCDs) are widely used for arteriotomy closure after percutaneous catheter–based procedures. In comparison to manual compression, VCDs have been associated with shorter time to hemostasis, shorter time to ambulation, and also decreased length of stay. Complexity of deployment, lack of immediate hemostasis, and residual deformity of the arterial wall remain as limitations of current VCDs. The aim of this study was to investigate the AbsorbaSeal™ 5.6.7F vascular closure device, a novel, completely bioabsorbable, intuitive, and easy to use VCD which uses a compressive, “sandwich”-type design comprising a low profile intravascular distal seal and gasket and an extravascular floating foot and proximal seal, in an open infrarenal aortic swine model. Methods Eight fully heparinized swine at a good laboratory practices facility underwent AbsorbaSeal™ 5.6.7F VCD closure of three 6F arteriotomies each in the proximal, mid, and distal infrarenal aorta. Two swine underwent harvest at each of four time cohorts: 30, 60, 90, and 120 days. Acute and chronic procedural safety and efficacy, as well as target site vascular remodeling over time, were the primary outcomes evaluated. Secondary outcome measures included local and systemic inflammatory responses, end-organ tissue analysis, and device-related complications through the follow-up periods. Histopathological evaluation was performed by a blinded pathologist. Standard statistical methods were used. Results In deployment of 24 AbsorbaSeal™ 5.6.7F VCDs, there were no device-related complications or mortalities. All deployments resulted in rapid arteriotomy seal (100% deployment success), with a mean time to hemostasis (cessation of arterial flow) of 21.5 s (median: 6.5 s) across a mean activated clotting time (ACT) of 356 s. Twenty of the 24 implant sites (83%) attained complete hemostasis within 20 s. Immediate post-implant and pre-termination angiographies at all time points were performed of all swine which demonstrated normal aortic appearance and tissue structure and normal downstream vascular beds. At 30 days, each implant’s intravascular distal seal and gasket were removed from the circulation and completely covered with a smooth neointimal layer. Minimal inflammation and no intimal or luminal thrombus were observed at any site at every time point. Conclusions AbsorbaSeal™ 5.6.7F is a safe, effective, and secure VCD that demonstrates rapid hemostasis in a fully heparinized open aortic porcine model. Removal from circulation and complete coverage of the intravascular distal seal and gasket with neointima occurred within 30 days post-implant. Natural transmural vessel healing from the arteriotomy itself with minimal inflammation was noted for each implant at every time point.