[Percutaneous suture of femoral artery after diagnostic coronary angiography]
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 18, 2026
Modified Octopus Technique for Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm
Published on: August 1, 2025
S el Amine1, E Teiger, E Aptecar
1Unité d'hémodynamique et de cardiologie interventionnelle, hôpital Henri-Mondor, Créteil.
Insights
Percutaneous suture devices provide faster haemostasis after femoral artery catheterization compared to manual compression. This allows for earlier patient ambulation, enhancing recovery after diagnostic coronary angiography.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Vascular Surgery
- Medical Devices
Background:
- Femoral artery catheterization is a common procedure.
- Achieving haemostasis is crucial for patient recovery.
- Traditional manual compression requires prolonged bed rest.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the efficacy and safety of percutaneous suture devices for haemostasis.
- To compare outcomes with manual compression after diagnostic coronary angiography.
Main Methods:
- A randomized study comparing percutaneous suture devices (group T) with manual compression (group C).
- Fifty patients in each group underwent diagnostic coronary angiography using a 6 F sheath.
- Clinical evaluation, echography at 24 hours, and phone calls at 15 days assessed outcomes.
Main Results:
- Haemostasis was significantly faster with suture devices (6 min) versus manual compression (20 min).
- Device technical success rate was 90% with early ambulation for most patients in group T.
- Ambulation delay was significantly reduced in group T (5 hours) compared to group C (24 hours).
- Clinical and echographic complication rates were similar (8%) in both groups.
Conclusions:
- Percutaneous suture devices are as safe and effective as manual compression for femoral artery haemostasis.
- These devices enable significantly earlier patient mobilization and ambulation post-procedure.
Unlabelled:
Complete local haemostasis after femoral artery catheterization can be performed using percutaneous suture devices. To evaluate efficacy and safety of these systems after diagnostic coronary angiography, we performed a randomized study where patients were treated either with a manual compression (group C) or a percutaneous suture (group T). Fifty patients were included in each group. Patients in group C had to rest at bed during 24 hours while patients in group T had to stand up and walk immediately after complete haemostasis was obtained. All angiographies were performed using a 6 F sheath. All patients had a clinical evaluation and an echography 24 hours after the procedure and all were reached by phone call at 15 days. Both groups were similar in term of age, sex ratio, diabetes, height and weight. Complete haemostasis was obtained in 20 +/- 6 mn in group C and in 6 +/- 10 mn in group T (p < 0.001). Device technical success rate in group T was 90%; 70% of patients walked immediately down the X ray table and 90% before the 4 hours. Ambulation delay was 24 +/- 5 hours in group C and 5 +/- 9 hours in group T (p < 0.0001). Clinical and echographic complications rate were similar in both groups (8%). There was no post procedure complication in group T (especially after ambulation) nor at the phone call.
Conclusion:
Femoral artery percutaneous suture after diagnostic coronary angiography is as safe and working than manual compression. It allows an immediate mobilization and ambulation, far earlier than compression.
