| ǥ :
|
ȣ - 480612 273 |
| Efficacy of hydrophilic hemostatic patch(Closur P.A.Dâ) after transradial coronary angiography. |
| Cardiology Division, Yonsei Cardiovascular Center and Cardiovascular Reserch Institute, Yonsei Univercity College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea |
| Jin-Bae Kim, Young-Guk Ko, MD, Ji-Young Shim, MD, Won-Ho Kim, MD, Seong-Hun Choi, MD,Mi Sook Ahn, RN, Jung Hwa Hwang, RN, So Young Kim, RN, Yangsoo Jang, MD, PhD, Won-Heum Shim,MD, PhD, Seung-Yun Cho, MD, PhD, Namsik Chung,MD,PhD. Sung-Soon Kim,MD,PhD |
Background: We evaluate the efficacy of nonwoven, hydrophilic hemostatic patch(closur P.A.D?) on hemostasis of arterial-access site versus compression device(RadiStop?) after transradial percutaneous coronary angiography.
Methods: A hemostatic patch was compared with compression device in 77 patients who underwent transradial coronary angiography in this hospital. Patients were randomized to each method and the major study end points included the time to achieve hemostasis and the incidence of vascular complications.
Results: There was no statistical significant differences in clinical and procedural characteristic between hemostatic patch (n=40) and compression device (n=37) groups except procedural time (35.0±19.1 vs. 26.4±12.1 minutes, p=0.021). A significant reduction in time to achieve hemostasis (56.3 ± 35.5 vs.139.3 ± 64.1 minutes, p<0.0001) was associated with use of the hemostatic patch. The incidence of vascular complications was similar in the overall population. (2.6% for hemostatic patch vs 5.2% for compression device, p=0.452). There were no major complications in hemostatic patch group, such as large hamatoma or acute radial occlusion.
Conclusions :The use of a hemostatic patch(closur PAD?) represents a safe alternative to compression method(RadiStop?). Hemostasis can be achieved faster with hemostatic patch than with compression device, without increase in access site complications.
|
|
|
|
|
