Abstract:
Background : Chula-clamp is a new vascular hemostatic device. A previous study showed no significant femoral vascular complication when compared with standard manual compression. No study has been compared between Chula-clamp and AngioSeal, an arterial puncture closing devices. Objectives : The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and complication of Chula-Clamp versus AngioSeal after coronary angiography (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods : This is a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing effectiveness of Chula-clamp to AngioSeal for attaining femoral artery hemostasis after CAG or PCI. Effectiveness and complications were determined by femoral vascular complication and duration of hospital stay. Result : One hundred sixty three patients scheduled for CAG or PCI in King Chulalongkorn Memorial hospital were enrolled (81 patients for Chula-clamp group and 82 patients for AngioSeal group). The baseline characteristics were statistical difference in body weight, systolic blood pressure before off catheter, number of heparin user with perform PCI, time of intervention and number of clopidogrel user. There were no statistical difference in vascular complications at access site when compared Chula-clamp with AngioSeal group (oozing = 2.5% vs 4.5%, p = 0.682 ; swelling 2.5% vs 0.0%, p = 0.245 ; hematoma 3.7% vs 4.9%, p = 1.00 ; rebleeding 2.5% vs 1.2%, p = 0.62, respectively). However, the mean length of hospital stay was significant shorter in AngioSeal group (16.2 + 8.8 hrs versus 22.9 + 18.3 hrs; p = 0.01). Conclusion : Chula-clamp is as effective as AngioSeal in term of femoral artery hemostasis after CAG or PCI but is inferior to AngioSeal in term of length of hospital stay.