Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Development, preclinical evaluation and validation of a novel quick vascular closure device for transluminal, cardiac and radiological arterial catheterization

  • Clinical Applications of Biomaterials
  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Following percutaneous coronary intervention, vascular closure devices (VCDs) are increasingly used to reduce time to ambulation, enhance patient comfort, and reduce potential complications compared with traditional manual compression. Newer techniques include complicated, more or less automated suture devices, local application of pads or the use of metal clips and staples. These techniques often have the disadvantage of being time consuming, expensive or not efficient enough. The VCD failure rate in association with vascular complications of 2.0–9.5%, depending on the type of VCD, is still not acceptable. Therefore, the aim of this study is to develop a self-expanding quick vascular closure device (QVCD) made from a bioabsorbable elastic polymer that can be easily applied through the placed introducer sheath. Bioabsorbable block-co-polymers were synthesized and the chemical and mechanical degradation were determined by in vitro tests. The best fitting polymer was selected for further investigation and for microinjection moulding. After comprehensive haemocompatibility analyses in vitro, QVCDs were implanted in arterial vessels following arteriotomy for different time points in sheep to investigate the healing process. The in vivo tests proved that the new QVCD can be safely placed in the arteriotomy hole through the existing sheath instantly sealing the vessel. The degradation time of 14 days found in vitro was sufficient for vessel healing. After 4 weeks, the remaining QVCD material was covered by neointima. Overall, our experiments showed the safety and feasibility of applying this novel QVCD through an existing arterial sheath and hence encourage future work with larger calibers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kern MJ, Lerman A, Bech JW, De Bruyne B, Eeckhout E, Fearon WF, et al. Physiological assessment of coronary artery disease in the cardiac catheterization laboratory: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiac Catheterization, Council on Clinical Cardiology. Circulation. 2006;114:1321–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Biancari F, D’Andrea V, Di Marco C, Savino G, Tiozzo V, Catania A. Meta-analysis of randomized trials on the efficacy of vascular closure devices after diagnostic angiography and angioplasty. Am Heart J. 2010;159:518–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Van Buuren F. 25th Report of performance figures of the heart catheterization laboratories in Germany. Der Kardiol. 2010;6:502–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Seldinger SI. Catheter replacement of the needle in percutaneous arteriography; a new technique. Acta Radiol. 1953;39:368–76.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hepp WKH. editor. Interventionelle Maßnahmen in Gefäßchirurgie. München; 2006.

  6. Erbel R, Pflicht, B, Kahlert, P, Konorza, T, editor. Herzkatheter-Manual: Diagnostik und interventionelle Therapie: Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag; 2012.

  7. Hon LQ, Ganeshan A, Thomas SM, Warakaulle D, Jagdish J, Uberoi R. An overview of vascular closure devices: what every radiologist should know. Eur J Radiol. 2010;73:181–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Patel R, Muller-Hulsbeck S, Morgan R, Uberoi R. Vascular closure devices in interventional radiology practice. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol. 2015;38:781–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dauerman HL, Applegate RJ, Cohen DJ. Vascular closure devices: the second decade. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:1617–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Piper WD, Malenka DJ, Ryan TJ Jr, Shubrooks SJ Jr, O’Connor GT, Robb JF, et al. Predicting vascular complications in percutaneous coronary interventions. Am Heart J. 2003;145:1022–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hon L-Q, Ganeshan A, Thomas SM, Warakaulle D, Jagdish J, Uberoi R. Vascular closure devices: a comparative overview. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2009;38:33–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Koreny M, Riedmuller E, Nikfardjam M, Siostrzonek P, Mullner M. Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterization: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004;291:350–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. ISO 10993 Biological evaluation of medical devices. 2010.

  14. Narayanaswamy M, Wright KC, Kandarpa K. Animal models for atherosclerosis, restenosis, and endovascular graft research. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2000;11:5–17.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. McMillen C. The sheep—an ideal model for biomedical research? ANZCCART News. 2001;2:1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Byrom MJ, Bannon PG, White GH, Ng MK. Animal models for the assessment of novel vascular conduits. J Vasc Surg. 2010;52:176–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ni RF, Kranokpiraksa P, Pavcnik D, Kakizawa H, Uchida BT, Keller FS, et al. Testing percutaneous arterial closure devices: an animal model. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol. 2009;32:313–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kansey KR, Evans DG, McGill LD, Nash JC. Feasibility testing of a bioresorbable hemostatic puncture closure device. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;17:A263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gargiulo NJ 3rd, Veith FJ, Ohki T, Scher LA, Berdejo GL, Lipsitz EC, et al. Histologic and duplex comparison of the perclose and angio-seal percutaneous closure devices. Vascular. 2007;15:24–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lochow P, Silber S. Immediate hemostasis of the femoral artery after heart catheterization: the present situation of closure systems]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2004;129:1753–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Sanborn TA, Gibbs HH, Brinker JA, Knopf WD, Kosinski EJ, Roubin GS. A multicenter randomized trial comparing a percutaneous collagen hemostasis device with conventional manual compression after diagnostic angiography and angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22:1273–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wong SC, Bachinsky W, Cambier P, Stoler R, Aji J, Rogers JH, et al. A randomized comparison of a novel bioabsorbable vascular closure device versus manual compression in the achievement of hemostasis after percutaneous femoral procedures: the ECLIPSE (Ensure’s Vascular Closure Device Speeds Hemostasis Trial). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:785–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Anderson JM, Rodriguez A, Chang DT. Foreign body reaction to biomaterials. Semin Immunol. 2008;20:86–100.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sefton MV, Gorbet MB. Biomaterial-associated thrombosis: roles of coagulation factors, complement, platelets and leukocytes. Biomaterials. 2004;25:5681–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Silver FH. Comparison of the histological responses observed at the arterial puncture site after employing manual compression. CathLab Dig. 2003;9:11.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The study was funded by the Federal Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) under the grant no. BMBF 01KQ0902 in the frame of the Gesundheitsregion REGiNA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. P. Wendel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Linti, C., Doser, M., Planck, H. et al. Development, preclinical evaluation and validation of a novel quick vascular closure device for transluminal, cardiac and radiological arterial catheterization. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 29, 83 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-018-6092-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-018-6092-y

Navigation