Читать книгу Interventional Cardiology - Группа авторов - Страница 67

1 1 Piper WD, Malenka DJ, Ryan TJ, Jr., et al. Predicting vascular complications in percutaneous coronary interventions. Am Heart J. 2003; 145(6):1022–9. Epub 2003/06/11. doi: 10.1016/S0002‐8703(03)00079–6. PubMed PMID: 12796758.

2 2 Lincoff AM, Bittl JA, Harrington RA, et al. Bivalirudin and provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade compared with heparin and planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade during percutaneous coronary intervention: REPLACE‐2 randomized trial. JAMA. 2003; 289(7):853–63. Epub 2003/02/18. doi: 10.1001/jama.289.7.853. PubMed PMID: 12588269.

3 3 Waksman R, King SB, 3rd, Douglas JS, et al. Predictors of groin complications after balloon and new‐device coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 1995; 75(14):886–9. Epub 1995/05/01. doi: 10.1016/s0002‐9149(99)80681‐x. PubMed PMID: 7732995.

4 4 Dauerman HL, Applegate RJ, Cohen DJ. Vascular closure devices: the second decade. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007; 50(17):1617–26. Epub 2007/10/24. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.07.028. PubMed PMID: 17950141.

5 5 Kim D, Orron DE, Skillman JJ, et al. Role of superficial femoral artery puncture in the development of pseudoaneurysm and arteriovenous fistula complicating percutaneous transfemoral cardiac catheterization. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1992; 25(2):91–7. Epub 1992/02/01. doi: 10.1002/ccd.1810250203. PubMed PMID: 1544161.

6 6 Sherev DA, Shaw RE, Brent BN. Angiographic predictors of femoral access site complications: implication for planned percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005; 65(2):196–202. Epub 2005/05/17. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20354. PubMed PMID: 15895402.

7 7 Ellis SG, Bhatt D, Kapadia S, et al. Correlates and outcomes of retroperitoneal hemorrhage complicating percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006; 67(4):541–5. Epub 2006/03/21. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20671. PubMed PMID: 16547938.

8 8 Farouque HM, Tremmel JA, Raissi Shabari F, et al. Risk factors for the development of retroperitoneal hematoma after percutaneous coronary intervention in the era of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and vascular closure devices. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 45(3):363–8. Epub 2005/02/01. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.10.042. PubMed PMID: 15680713.

9 9 Schnyder G, Sawhney N, Whisenant B, et al. Common femoral artery anatomy is influenced by demographics and comorbidity: implications for cardiac and peripheral invasive studies. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2001; 53(3):289–95. Epub 2001/07/18. doi: 10.1002/ccd.1169. PubMed PMID: 11458402.

10 10 Seldinger SI. Catheter replacement of the needle in percutaneous arteriography; a new technique. Acta Radiol. 1953; 39(5):368–76. Epub 1953/05/01. doi: 10.3109/00016925309136722. PubMed PMID: 13057644.

11 11 Turi ZG. Optimizing vascular access: routine femoral angiography keeps the vascular complication away. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005; 65(2):203–4. Epub 2005/05/17. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20412. PubMed PMID: 15895408.

12 12 Grier D, Hartnell G. Percutaneous femoral artery puncture: practice and anatomy. Br J Radiol. 1990; 63(752):602–4. Epub 1990/08/01. doi: 10.1259/0007‐1285‐63‐752‐602. PubMed PMID: 2400874.

13 13 Yun SJ, Nam DH, Ryu JK. Femoral artery access using the US‐determined inguinal ligament and femoral head as reliable landmarks: prospective study of usefulness and safety. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015; 26(4):552–9. Epub 2015/03/05. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2014.12.613. PubMed PMID: 25735827.

14 14 Seto AH, Abu‐Fadel MS, Sparling JM, et al. Real‐time ultrasound guidance facilitates femoral arterial access and reduces vascular complications: FAUST (Femoral Arterial Access With Ultrasound Trial). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010; 3(7):751–8. Epub 2010/07/24. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.04.015. PubMed PMID: 20650437.

15 15 Burzotta F, Shoeib O, Aurigemma C, Trani C. Angio‐Guidewire‐Ultrasound (AGU) Guidance for Femoral Access in Procedures Requiring Large Sheaths. J Invasive Cardiol. 2019; 31(2):E37–E9. Epub 2019/02/01. PubMed PMID: 30700629.

16 16 Ambrose JA, Lardizabal J, Mouanoutoua M, et al. Femoral micropuncture or routine introducer study (FEMORIS). Cardiology. 2014; 129(1):39–43. Epub 2014/07/12. doi: 10.1159/000362536. PubMed PMID: 25012707.

17 17 Pracyk JB, Wall TC, Longabaugh JP, et al. A randomized trial of vascular hemostasis techniques to reduce femoral vascular complications after coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 1998; 81(8):970–6. Epub 1998/05/12. doi: 10.1016/s0002‐9149(98)00074‐5. PubMed PMID: 9576155.

18 18 Semler HJ. Transfemoral catheterization: mechanical versus manual control of bleeding. Radiology. 1985; 154(1):234–5. Epub 1985/01/01. doi: 10.1148/radiology.154.1.3880610. PubMed PMID: 3880610.

19 19 Bogart MA. Time to hemostasis: a comparison of manual versus mechanical compression of the femoral artery. Am J Crit Care. 1995; 4(2):149–56. Epub 1995/03/01. PubMed PMID: 7749448.

20 20 Benson LM, Wunderly D, Perry B, et al. Determining best practice: comparison of three methods of femoral sheath removal after cardiac interventional procedures. Heart Lung. 2005; 34(2):115–21. Epub 2005/03/12. doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2004.06.011. PubMed PMID: 15761456.

21 21 Ormiston JA, Shaw BL, Panther MJ, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention with bivalirudin anticoagulation, immediate sheath removal, and early ambulation: a feasibility study with implications for day‐stay procedures. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2002; 55(3):289–93. Epub 2002/03/01. doi: 10.1002/ccd.10125. PubMed PMID: 11870930.

22 22 Koch KT, Piek JJ, de Winter RJ, et al. Two hour ambulation after coronary angioplasty and stenting with 6 F guiding catheters and low dose heparin. Heart. 1999; 81(1):53–6. Epub 1999/04/30. doi: 10.1136/hrt.81.1.53. PubMed PMID: 10220545; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC1728893.

23 23 Koch KT, Piek JJ, de Winter RJ, et al. Early ambulation after coronary angioplasty and stenting with six French guiding catheters and low‐dose heparin. Am J Cardiol. 1997; 80(8):1084–6. Epub 1997/11/14. doi: 10.1016/s0002‐9149(97)00609‐7. PubMed PMID: 9352984.

24 24 Vlasic W, Almond D, Massel D. Reducing bedrest following arterial puncture for coronary interventional procedures‐‐impact on vascular complications: the BAC Trial. J Invasive Cardiol. 2001; 13(12):788–92. Epub 2001/12/04. PubMed PMID: 11731689.

25 25 Patel MR, Jneid H, Derdeyn CP, et al. Arteriotomy closure devices for cardiovascular procedures: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2010; 122(18):1882–93. Epub 2010/10/06. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e3181f9b345. PubMed PMID: 20921445.

26 26 Hoffer EK, Bloch RD. Percutaneous arterial closure devices. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003; 14(7):865–85. Epub 2003/07/09. doi: 10.1097/01.rvi.0000071086.76348.8e. PubMed PMID: 12847195.

27 27 Barbash IM, Barbanti M, Webb J, et al. Comparison of vascular closure devices for access site closure after transfemoral aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J. 2015; 36(47):3370–9. Epub 2015/09/01. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv417. PubMed PMID: 26314688.

28 28 Seeger J, Gonska B, Rodewald C, et al. Impact of suture mediated femoral access site closure with the Prostar XL compared to the ProGlide system on outcome in transfemoral aortic valve implantation. Int J Cardiol. 2016; 223:564–7. Epub 2016/08/26. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.08.193. PubMed PMID: 27561160.

29 29 Hermiller JB, Simonton C, Hinohara T, et al. The StarClose Vascular Closure System: interventional results from the CLIP study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006; 68(5):677–83. Epub 2006/10/14. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20922. PubMed PMID: 17039508.

30 30 Van Mieghem NM, Latib A, van der Heyden J, et al. Percutaneous Plug‐Based Arteriotomy Closure Device for Large‐Bore Access: A Multicenter Prospective Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017; 10(6):613–9. Epub 2017/03/25. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.12.277. PubMed PMID: 28335899.

31 31 Van Den Berg JC. A close look at closure devices. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2006; 47(3):285–95. Epub 2006/06/09. PubMed PMID: 16760865.

32 32 Nader RG, Garcia JC, Drushal K, Pesek T. Clinical evaluation of SyvekPatch in patients undergoing interventional, EPS and diagnostic cardiac catheterization procedures. J Invasive Cardiol. 2002; 14(6):305–7. Epub 2002/06/04. PubMed PMID: 12042620.

33 33 Applegate RJ, Sacrinty MT, Kutcher MA, et al. Propensity score analysis of vascular complications after diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention using thrombin hemostatic patch‐facilitated manual compression. J Invasive Cardiol. 2007; 19(4):164–70. Epub 2007/04/04. PubMed PMID: 17404401.

34 34 Najjar SF, Healey NA, Healey CM, et al. Evaluation of poly‐N‐acetyl glucosamine as a hemostatic agent in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization: a double‐blind, randomized study. J Trauma. 2004; 57(1 Suppl):S38–41. Epub 2004/07/29. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000136749.20063.f0. PubMed PMID: 15280750.

35 35 Palmer BL, Gantt DS, Lawrence ME, et al. Effectiveness and safety of manual hemostasis facilitated by the SyvekPatch with one hour of bedrest after coronary angiography using six‐French catheters. Am J Cardiol. 2004; 93(1):96–7. Epub 2003/12/31. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2003.08.077. PubMed PMID: 14697477.

36 36 Tavris DR, Gallauresi BA, Lin B, et al. Risk of local adverse events following cardiac catheterization by hemostasis device use and gender. J Invasive Cardiol. 2004; 16(9):459–64. Epub 2004/09/09. PubMed PMID: 15353824.

37 37 Prouse A, Gunzburger E, Yang F, et al. Contemporary Use and Outcomes of Arterial Closure Devices After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020; 9(4):e015223. Epub 2020/02/18. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.015223. PubMed PMID: 32063086; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC7070201.

38 38 Sohail MR, Khan AH, Holmes DR, Jr., et al. Infectious complications of percutaneous vascular closure devices. Mayo Clin Proc. 2005; 80(8):1011–5. Epub 2005/08/12. doi: 10.4065/80.8.1011. PubMed PMID: 16092579.

39 39 Koreny M, Riedmuller E, Nikfardjam M, et al. Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterization: systematic review and meta‐analysis. JAMA. 2004; 291(3):350–7. Epub 2004/01/22. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.3.350. PubMed PMID: 14734598.

40 40 Nikolsky E, Mehran R, Halkin A, et al. Vascular complications associated with arteriotomy closure devices in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures: a meta‐analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44(6):1200–9. Epub 2004/09/15. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.06.048. PubMed PMID: 15364320.

41 41 Vaitkus PT. A meta‐analysis of percutaneous vascular closure devices after diagnostic catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention. J Invasive Cardiol. 2004; 16(5):243–6. Epub 2004/05/21. PubMed PMID: 15152128.

42 42 Dangas G, Mehran R, Kokolis S, et al. Vascular complications after percutaneous coronary interventions following hemostasis with manual compression versus arteriotomy closure devices. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 38(3):638–41. Epub 2001/08/31. doi: 10.1016/s0735‐1097(01)01449‐8. PubMed PMID: 11527609.

43 43 Warren BS, Warren SG, Miller SD. Predictors of complications and learning curve using the Angio‐Seal closure device following interventional and diagnostic catheterization. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 1999; 48(2):162–6. Epub 1999/10/03. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1522‐726x(199910)48:2<162::aid‐ccd8>3.0.co;2‐2. PubMed PMID: 10506771.

44 44 Farooq V, Goedhart D, Ludman P, et al. Relationship Between Femoral Vascular Closure Devices and Short‐Term Mortality From 271 845 Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Procedures Performed in the United Kingdom Between 2006 and 2011: A Propensity Score‐Corrected Analysis From the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 9(6). Epub 2016/05/27. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.003560. PubMed PMID: 27225421.

45 45 Robertson L, Andras A, Colgan F, Jackson R. Vascular closure devices for femoral arterial puncture site haemostasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; 3:CD009541. Epub 2016/03/08. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009541.pub2. PubMed PMID: 26948236.

46 46 Duffin DC, Muhlestein JB, Allisson SB, et al. Femoral arterial puncture management after percutaneous coronary procedures: a comparison of clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between manual compression and two different vascular closure devices. J Invasive Cardiol. 2001; 13(5):354–62. Epub 2001/06/01. PubMed PMID: 11385148.

47 47 Rickli H, Unterweger M, Sutsch G, et al. Comparison of costs and safety of a suture‐mediated closure device with conventional manual compression after coronary artery interventions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2002; 57(3):297–302. Epub 2002/11/01. doi: 10.1002/ccd.10294. PubMed PMID: 12410501.

48 48 Schulz‐Schupke S, Helde S, Gewalt S, et al. Comparison of vascular closure devices vs manual compression after femoral artery puncture: the ISAR‐CLOSURE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014; 312(19):1981–7. Epub 2014/11/17. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.15305. PubMed PMID: 25399273.

49 49 Toggweiler S, Gurvitch R, Leipsic J, et al. Percutaneous aortic valve replacement: vascular outcomes with a fully percutaneous procedure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 59(2):113–8. Epub 2012/01/10. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.08.069. PubMed PMID: 22222073.

50 50 Vierhout BP, Pol RA, El Moumni M, Zeebregts CJ. Editor's Choice – Arteriotomy Closure Devices in EVAR, TEVAR, and TAVR: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis of Randomised Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017; 54(1):104–15. Epub 2017/04/26. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.03.015. PubMed PMID: 28438400.

51 51 Biancari F, Romppanen H, Savontaus M, et al. MANTA versus ProGlide vascular closure devices in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Int J Cardiol. 2018; 263:29–31. Epub 2018/04/24. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.04.065. PubMed PMID: 29681408.

52 52 Feldman T. Percutaneous suture closure for management of large French size arterial and venous puncture. J Interven Cardiol 2000; 13:237–41.

53 53 Solomon LW, Fusman B, Jolly N, Kim A, Feldman T. Percutaneous suture closure for management of large French size arterial puncture in aortic valvuloplasty. J Invasive Cardiol. 2001; 13(8):592–6. Epub 2001/08/02. PubMed PMID: 11481509.

54 54 Perlowski AS, Salinger MH, Justin, P, et al. Femoral access for TAVR: techniques for prevention and endovascular management of complications. In: Dieter RS DRJ, Dieter RA III editor. Endovascular Interventions: A Case‐Based Approach. NY: Springer; 2014. p. 859–74.

55 55 Genereux P, Kodali S, Leon MB, et al. Clinical outcomes using a new crossover balloon occlusion technique for percutaneous closure after transfemoral aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011; 4(8):861–7. Epub 2011/08/20. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2011.05.019. PubMed PMID: 21851899.

56 56 Power D, Schafer U, Guedeney P, et al. Impact of percutaneous closure device type on vascular and bleeding complications after TAVR: A post hoc analysis from the BRAVO‐3 randomized trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019; 93(7):1374–81. Epub 2019/05/23. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28295. PubMed PMID: 31116908.

57 57 Kiramijyan S, Magalhaes MA, Ben‐Dor I, et al. The adjunctive use of Angio‐Seal in femoral vascular closure following percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve replacement. EuroIntervention. 2016; 12(1):88–93. Epub 2016/05/14. doi: 10.4244/EIJV12I1A16. PubMed PMID: 27173868.

58 58 Saugel B, Scheeren TWL, Teboul JL. Ultrasound‐guided central venous catheter placement: a structured review and recommendations for clinical practice. Crit Care. 2017; 21(1):225. Epub 2017/08/29. doi: 10.1186/s13054‐017‐1814‐y. PubMed PMID: 28844205; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC5572160.

59 59 Cilingiroglu M, Salinger M, Zhao D, Feldman T. Technique of temporary subcutaneous “Figure‐of‐Eight” sutures to achieve hemostasis after removal of large‐caliber femoral venous sheaths. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011; 78(1):155–60. Epub 2011/06/18. doi: 10.1002/ccd.22946. PubMed PMID: 21681904.

60 60 Geis NA, Pleger ST, Chorianopoulos E, et al. Feasibility and clinical benefit of a suture‐mediated closure device for femoral vein access after percutaneous edge‐to‐edge mitral valve repair. EuroIntervention. 2015; 10(11):1346–53. Epub 2014/04/04. doi: 10.4244/EIJV10I11A231. PubMed PMID: 24694560.

61 61 Steppich B, Stegmuller F, Rumpf PM, et al. Vascular complications after percutaneous mitral valve repair and venous access closure using suture or closure device. J Interv Cardiol. 2018; 31(2):223–9. Epub 2017/11/18. doi: 10.1111/joic.12459. PubMed PMID: 29148095.