Comparison of complications after transfemoral coronary angiography between mechanical and manual closure techniques

• Main Authors: Megan Bontrager, Sam Abraham
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Taylor & Francis Group 2017-01-01
• Series: Cogent Medicine
• Subjects: coronary angiography; femoral approach; closure techniques; bedrest; pain; access site complications
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2331205X.2017.1362185

Cardiovascular disease continues to be the leading cause of death in the United States. Coronary angiography is one of the most commonly used diagnostic tools in the identification of coronary artery disease, and it remains a prime treatment option for significant coronary artery stenosis. The widely used femoral approach to coronary angiography does not come without significant risk for access site complications, patient complaints of pain, and lengthy bedrest durations. With these concepts in mind came the evolution and implementation of multiple vascular closure devices. The purpose of this study was to compare complication rates after coronary angiography via the femoral approach between mechanical and manual closure techniques, the pain associated with each, and the duration of bedrest employed using a systematic review of the literature. Upon conclusion of the literature review, evidence has shown to provide significant data supporting the use of mechanical closure devices while reducing access site complications, pain, and lengthy bedrest durations when used in appropriate patients.