Impact of sheath diameter of different sheath types on vascular complications and mortality in transfemoral TAVI approaches using the Proglide closure device

Zisis Dimitriadis, Werner Scholtz, Stephan M Ensminger, Cornelia Piper, Thomas Bitter, Marcus Wiemer, Marios Vlachojannis, Jochen Börgermann, Lothar Faber, Dieter Horstkotte, Jan Gummert and Smita Scholtz

PLOS ONE, 2017, vol. 12, issue 8, 1-12

Abstract: Objective: Evaluation of the impact of the sheath diameter on vascular complications and mortality in transfemoral aortic valve implantation. Method: Between 2012 and 2014, 183 patients underwent the procedure using a sheath diameter of 18–24 F. This collective was divided into two groups: group 1, with a sheath diameter of 18F (G1, n = 94), consisted of patients with 18F Medtronic Sentrant and 18 F Direct Flow sheaths, and group 2 with a sheath diameter of 19–24 F (G2, n = 89) consisted of patients with Edwards expandable e-sheath and Solopath sheaths. Perclose-Proglide® was used as a closure device in all patients. Results: G1 had significantly more female patients (64.9% vs. 46.1% in G2, p = 0.01) and the average BMI was lower (26 ± 4.5% vs. 27.4 ± 4.7%, p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in the incidence of major and minor vascular complications (G1: 12.8% vs. G2: 12.4%, p = 0.9). 30-day mortality was similar in both groups (G1: 6.4 ± 2.5% [95% CI: 0.88–0.98], G2: 3.7 ± 1.9% [95% CI: 0.92–0.99]. The Kaplan Meier analysis of survival revealed no significant differences either. Conclusion: The difference in sheath diameter had no effect on either incidence or severity of vascular complications. There was no impact on mortality either.

Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0183658 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 83658&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0183658

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183658

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone (plosone@plos.org).