Vascular Closure Devices versus Manual Compression in Cardiac Interventional Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Backgrounds. Manual compression (MC) and vascular closure device (VCD) are two methods of vascular access site hemostasis after cardiac interventional procedures. However, there is still controversial over the use of them and a lack of comprehensive and systematic meta-analysis on this issue. Method...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Cardiovascular Therapeutics |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/8569188 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832555193171968000 |
|---|---|
| author | Naidong Pang Jia Gao Binghang Zhang Min Guo Nan Zhang Meng Sun Rui Wang |
| author_facet | Naidong Pang Jia Gao Binghang Zhang Min Guo Nan Zhang Meng Sun Rui Wang |
| author_sort | Naidong Pang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Backgrounds. Manual compression (MC) and vascular closure device (VCD) are two methods of vascular access site hemostasis after cardiac interventional procedures. However, there is still controversial over the use of them and a lack of comprehensive and systematic meta-analysis on this issue. Methods. Original articles comparing VCD and MC in cardiac interventional procedures were searched in PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science through April 2022. Efficacy, safety, patient satisfaction, and other parameters were assessed between two groups. Heterogeneity among studies was evaluated by I2 index and the Cochran Q test, respectively. Publication bias was assessed using the funnel plot and Egger’s test. Results. A total of 32 studies were included after screening with inclusion and exclusion criteria (33481 patients). This meta-analysis found that VCD resulted in shorter time to hemostasis, ambulation, and discharge (p<0.00001). In terms of vascular complication risks, VCD group might be associated with a lower risk of major complications (p=0.0001), but the analysis limited to randomized controlled trials did not support this result (p=0.68). There was no significant difference in total complication rates (p=0.08) and bleeding-related complication rates (p=0.05) between the two groups. Patient satisfaction was higher in VCD group (p=0.002). Meta-regression analysis revealed no specific covariate as an influencing factor for above results (p>0.05). Conclusions. Compared with MC, the use of VCDs significantly shortens the time of hemostasis and allows earlier ambulation and discharge, meanwhile without increase in vascular complications. In addition, use of VCDs achieves higher patient satisfaction and leads cost savings for patients and institutions. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-94527105cf884091bb84b6eea891c468 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1755-5922 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Cardiovascular Therapeutics |
| spelling | doaj-art-94527105cf884091bb84b6eea891c4682025-02-03T05:49:25ZengWileyCardiovascular Therapeutics1755-59222022-01-01202210.1155/2022/8569188Vascular Closure Devices versus Manual Compression in Cardiac Interventional Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisNaidong Pang0Jia Gao1Binghang Zhang2Min Guo3Nan Zhang4Meng Sun5Rui Wang6Department of CardiologyDepartment of CardiologyFirst Clinical Medical CollegeDepartment of CardiologyDepartment of CardiologyDepartment of CardiologyDepartment of CardiologyBackgrounds. Manual compression (MC) and vascular closure device (VCD) are two methods of vascular access site hemostasis after cardiac interventional procedures. However, there is still controversial over the use of them and a lack of comprehensive and systematic meta-analysis on this issue. Methods. Original articles comparing VCD and MC in cardiac interventional procedures were searched in PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science through April 2022. Efficacy, safety, patient satisfaction, and other parameters were assessed between two groups. Heterogeneity among studies was evaluated by I2 index and the Cochran Q test, respectively. Publication bias was assessed using the funnel plot and Egger’s test. Results. A total of 32 studies were included after screening with inclusion and exclusion criteria (33481 patients). This meta-analysis found that VCD resulted in shorter time to hemostasis, ambulation, and discharge (p<0.00001). In terms of vascular complication risks, VCD group might be associated with a lower risk of major complications (p=0.0001), but the analysis limited to randomized controlled trials did not support this result (p=0.68). There was no significant difference in total complication rates (p=0.08) and bleeding-related complication rates (p=0.05) between the two groups. Patient satisfaction was higher in VCD group (p=0.002). Meta-regression analysis revealed no specific covariate as an influencing factor for above results (p>0.05). Conclusions. Compared with MC, the use of VCDs significantly shortens the time of hemostasis and allows earlier ambulation and discharge, meanwhile without increase in vascular complications. In addition, use of VCDs achieves higher patient satisfaction and leads cost savings for patients and institutions.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/8569188 |
| spellingShingle | Naidong Pang Jia Gao Binghang Zhang Min Guo Nan Zhang Meng Sun Rui Wang Vascular Closure Devices versus Manual Compression in Cardiac Interventional Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Cardiovascular Therapeutics |
| title | Vascular Closure Devices versus Manual Compression in Cardiac Interventional Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_full | Vascular Closure Devices versus Manual Compression in Cardiac Interventional Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_fullStr | Vascular Closure Devices versus Manual Compression in Cardiac Interventional Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Vascular Closure Devices versus Manual Compression in Cardiac Interventional Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_short | Vascular Closure Devices versus Manual Compression in Cardiac Interventional Procedures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_sort | vascular closure devices versus manual compression in cardiac interventional procedures systematic review and meta analysis |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/8569188 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT naidongpang vascularclosuredevicesversusmanualcompressionincardiacinterventionalproceduressystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT jiagao vascularclosuredevicesversusmanualcompressionincardiacinterventionalproceduressystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT binghangzhang vascularclosuredevicesversusmanualcompressionincardiacinterventionalproceduressystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT minguo vascularclosuredevicesversusmanualcompressionincardiacinterventionalproceduressystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT nanzhang vascularclosuredevicesversusmanualcompressionincardiacinterventionalproceduressystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT mengsun vascularclosuredevicesversusmanualcompressionincardiacinterventionalproceduressystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT ruiwang vascularclosuredevicesversusmanualcompressionincardiacinterventionalproceduressystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |