Safety and efficacy of brachial approach for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: There are many percutaneous coronary approaches. The most commonly used one is the radial artery because of its lowest risk of adverse vascular events. However, it could not be an option in some situations as congenital radial artery hypoplasia and spasm. In these cases, the second most common access is the femoral artery. The current literature over the brachial artery access is controversial. Thus, the aim of this study was to verify the brachial artery approach's effectiveness and safety. RESULTS: We studied 300 patients who underwent elective coronary angiography and angioplasty in our institution with failed radial access between August 2022 and February 2023. They were classified into two groups; 150 patients with brachial access and 150 with femoral access. Access, procedural and fluoroscopy times were recorded. All patients were examined carefully immediately after the procedure and before discharge to assess any complications. Left brachial access was used more frequently than left femoral access (32.7% vs. 22.7%, P = 0.05), but no significant difference noted regarding right sided or bilateral access. Procedure time, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume did not significantly differ (P = 0.19, 0.06 and 0.1 respectively). However, brachial group had shorter access time (2.6 ± 1.1 vs. 3.4 ± 0.7 min, P = 0.05) and hospital stay (3.5 ± 1.1 vs. 5.9 ± 1.3 days, P < 0.001). Regarding major and minor complications (especially hematomas), they were significantly less in the brachial arm (P = 0.04 and P = 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Brachial access is a safe, efficient and non-inferior to the femoral route for coronary intervention whenever radial access is not an option.

Complications of Radial vs Femoral Access for Coronary Angiography and Intervention: What Do the Data Tell Us?

In the last decades, radial access, as an alternative to femoral access, has rapidly evolved and emerged as the preferred vascular access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The use of radial access for PCI can reduce access-site bleeding, particularly retroperitoneal bleeding, and risk of developing pseudoaneurysm, while also improving patient comfort after procedure (eg, early ambulation). However, radial access requires a longer learning curve to develop technical skills, and the data on radial artery graft for coronary artery bypass graft after radial access remain insufficient. Further, recent clinical trials have shown conflicts regarding whether radial access is associated with lower mortality in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Despite these recent investigations, it is still debated whether there are benefits associated with radial access over femoral access for PCI. In this review, we will evaluate radial access compared with femoral access for PCI on clinical outcomes and further discuss the usefulness of radial access.

Stent graft implantation from distal radial access-A novel way to treat femoral access site complication during transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A case report.

In this paper, a case of an 82-year-old man who was admitted to our department with sever symptomatic degenerative aortic valve stenosis is presented and discussed. After all screening procedures, a successful transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement was performed, but the closure of the femoral access was unsuccessful due to suture-based device failure. We decided to perform a prolonged balloon dilatation and external compression at the bleeding site, but the bleeding did not stop; therefore, an iCover stent graft was implanted from distal radial artery access using slender technique. Following that, the bleeding was stopped, and the patient had an uneventful outcome.

"Piggyback Pigtails": Simplifying secondary transradial access for TAVR.

Minimalist approaches have evolved for TAVR over the last years with impact on in-hospital stay and patient safety. As part of this concept, transradial secondary arterial access is capable of reducing vascular and bleeding complications. Yet, steering of the marker pigtail catheter in the descending aorta might by fluoroscopic imaging sometimes be challenging. In our manuscript, we present a very simple "piggyback" technique, simplifying management of transradial secondary access in transfemoral TAVR.

Comparison of ultrasound- versus fluoroscopy-guidEd femorAl access In tranS-catheter aortic valve replacement In the Era of contempoRary devices: The EASIER registry.

BACKGROUND: Vascular complications (VCs) still represent one of the principal concerns of trans-femoral trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR). New-generation devices can minimize such complications but the arterial access management is left to the operator's choice. This study aims to describe the rate of VCs in a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices and to determine whether an ultrasound-guided (USG) vs. a fluoroscopy-guided (FG) femoral access management has an impact on their prevention. METHODS: This is a prospective, observational, multicenter study. Consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices were analyzed from January 2022 to October 2022 in five tertiary care centers. Femoral accesses were managed according to the operator's preferences. All the patients underwent a pre-discharge peripheral ultrasound control. VCs and bleedings were the main endpoints of interest. RESULTS: A total of 458 consecutive patients were enrolled (274 in the USG group and 184 in the FG group). VCs occurred in 6.5 % of the patients (5.2 % minor and 1.3 % major). There was no difference between the USG and the FG groups in terms of any VCs (7.3 % vs. 5.4 %; p = 0.4), or any VARC-3 bleedings (6.9 % vs 6 %, p = 0.9). At logistic regression analysis, the two guidance strategies did not result as predictors of VCs (odds Ratio 0.8, 95 % Confidence Interval 0.46-1.4; P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices, the occurrence of VCs is low and mostly represented by minor VCs. USG and FG modalities did not affect the rate of VCs.

Vascular Complications Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation, Using MANTA (Collagen Plug-Based) versus PROSTAR (Suture-Based), from a French Single-Center Retrospective Registry.

TAVI requires a large-bore arteriotomy. Closure is usually performed by the suture system. Some studies report a vascular complication rate of up to 21%. MANTA is a recently developed percutaneous closure system dedicated to large caliber vessels based on an anchoring system. Early studies report a lower rate of vascular complications with MANTA devices. This single-center retrospective study included all patients who underwent femoral TAVI at the Brest University Hospital from 20 November 2019 to 31 March 2021. The primary endpoint is the rate of vascular complications (major and minor) pre and post-TAVI procedure. In total, 264 patients were included. There were no significant differences in vascular complications (major and minor) between the two groups (13.6% in the MANTA group versus 21.2% in the PROSTAR group; p = 0.105), although there was a tendency to have fewer minor vascular complications in the Manta group (12.1% versus 20.5%; p = 0.067). Manta was associated with a lower rate of bleeding complications (3.8% versus 15.2%; p = 0.002), predominantly minor complications with fewer closure failures (4.5% versus 13.6%; p = 0.01), less use of covered stents (4.5% versus 12.9%; p = 0.016), and with no difference in the need for vascular surgery compared to the Prostar group (1.5% versus 2.3%; p = 0.652). On the other hand, Manta was associated with a higher rate of femoral stenosis (4.5% versus 0%; p = 0.013) without clinical significance (1.5% versus 0%; p = 0.156). The Manta and Prostar devices are equivalent in terms of vascular complications. The Manta, compared to the Prostar, is associated with fewer bleeding complications.

Evaluation of the MYNX CONTROL™ Arterial Closure System for Achieving Primary Hemostasis after Arterial Femoral Access Following Peripheral Arterial Interventions, Compared to the FemoSealTM Closure System.

Background: In addition to manual compression, various vascular closure devices (VCD) are available to seal the puncture site following arterial vascular procedures. Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the extravascular MYNX CONTROL closure system for achieving primary hemostasis after femoral arterial access following peripheral arterial procedures, compared to the intravascular FemoSeal Aclosure system. Patients and Methods: A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent endovascular intervention between April and November 2022 was performed. The primary endpoint was the incidence of significant puncture site complication defined as a complication resulting in medical treatment. Secondary endpoints included peri-interventional incidence of hematoma, peri-interventional changes in hemoglobin, incidence of emergency diagnostics and predictors for closure system failure. Results: Five hundred and forty-eight patients were included in this analysis. False aneurysm occurred in 18/273 cases (6.6%) following the use of the MYNX closure system, compared to 6/275 cases after using the FemoSeal closure system (2.2%, p = 0.006). The incidence of post-interventional hematoma was not significantly different (28 (10.3%) in the MYNX group versus 32 (11.6%) in the FemoSeal group, p = 0.358). Peri-interventional hemoglobin drop did not differ between groups (p = 0.449). Emergency diagnostics were not significantly performed more often in the MYNX group (14 (5.1%) versus 8 (2.9%), p = 0.134). A post-interventional duplex sonography showed stenosis at the puncture site in one patient after use of the MYNX system. For the entire cohort, oral anticoagulation was the only predictor for the failure of the closure device (p = 0.036). Conclusions: Device failure was more common after using the extravascular MYNX CONTROL system than after using the intravascular FemoSeal system. However, the need for surgical or interventional therapy due to device failure was low.

ABS-SMART (Aortic Balloon Supporting for Superior Mesenteric Artery Recanalization Technique): A New Technical Option for Recanalization of Complete Superior Mesenteric Artery Occlusion in Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: To report our experience with a new technique for recanalization of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA)/celiac trunk (CT) with complete occlusion at the origin. TECHNIQUE: We describe our ABS-SMART (Aortic Balloon Supporting for Superior Mesenteric Artery Recanalization Technique) for recanalization of the CT and SMA in cases of complete occlusion of these arteries with a short or inexistent stump, which usually corresponds to chronic lesions with important calcification of the ostium. CONCLUSION: The ABS-SMART is an alternative for the recanalization of visceral arteries in cases where other conventional techniques have failed. It is particularly useful in scenarios characterized by a short occlusion at the origin of the target vessel, with no entry stump or severe calcification at the origin. CLINICAL IMPACT: Catheterization and recanalization of visceral stenoses may pose a challenge in some cases, as for example in the presence of a very narrow angle between the root or origin of the vessel and the aorta, as well as in the case of long and calcified stenoses, or when arteriography is unable to visualize the origin of the vessel. The present study describes our experience with the endovascular revascularization of visceral vessels using an aortic balloon-supported recanalization technique not previously described in the literature, that may be an effective alternative for the treatment of lesions of difficult access, such as total occlusion at the origin of the target vessel, with no entry stump or severe calcification at the origin of the SMA and CT, by improving the chances for technical success.

The Safety and Effectiveness of the Prostar XL Closure Device Compared to Open Groin Cutdown for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of percutaneous femoral closure with the Prostar XL for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) to those of open femoral cutdown, and to evaluate factors which may predict the failure of percutaneous closure. METHODS: Patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm between 2005 and 2013 were included. Patient characteristics, anatomic femoral artery measurements, and postoperative complications were recorded retrospectively. Operator experience was defined with a cut-off point of >30 Prostar XL closures performed. Comparisons were made per access site. RESULTS: A total of 443 access sites were included, with percutaneous closure used in 257 cases (58.0%) and open cutdown in 186 cases (42.0%). The complication rate was 2.7% for the percutaneous and 4.3% for the open cutdown group (P = .482). No significant differences between groups were found with respect to 30-day mortality, wound infections, thrombosis, seromas, or bleeding complications. Fourteen failures (5.4%) of percutaneous closure occurred. The success rates were similar for experienced and unexperienced operators (94.2% vs 95.5%, P = .768). Renal insufficiency was more common in the failed than in the successful percutaneous closure group (64.3% vs 24.7%, P = .003). Common femoral artery calcification or diameter, BMI, sheath size, or operator experience did not predict failure. No further complications were seen in follow-up CT at 1-3 years postoperatively. CONCLUSION: The use of the Prostar XL is safe compared to open cutdown. The success rate is 94.6%. Operator experience, sheath size, obesity, or femoral artery diameter or calcification do not appear to predict a failure of percutaneous closure. Complications seem to occur perioperatively, and late complications are rare.

Total Transfemoral Branched Endovascular Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repair (TORCH2): Short-term and 1-Year Outcomes From a National Multicenter Registry.

OBJECTIVE: The use of steerable sheaths to allow total transfemoral access (TFA) of branched endovascular repair (BEVAR) of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms has been proposed as an alternative to upper extremity access (UEA); however, multicenter results from high-volume aortic centers are lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Total Transfemoral Branched Endovascular Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repair (TORCH2) study is a physician-initiated, national, multicenter, retrospective, observational registry (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04930172) of patients undergoing BEVAR with a TFA for the cannulation of reno-visceral target vessels (TV). The study endpoints, classified according to Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards, were (1) technical success; (2) 30-day peri-operative major adverse events; (3) 30-day and midterm clinical success; (4) 30-day and midterm branch instability and TV-related adverse events (reinterventions, type I/III endoleaks). RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients (42 males; median age: 72 years) were treated through a TFA. All the centers included their entire experience with TFA: 18 (26%) used a homemade steerable sheath, and in 28 cases (41%), a stabilizing guidewire was employed. Steerable technical success was achieved in 66 patients (97%) with an overall in-hospital mortality of 6 patients (9%, 3 elective cases [3/58, 5%] and 3 urgent/emergent cases [3/12, 25%]) and major adverse event rate of 18% (12 patients). Overall, 257 bridging stents were implanted; of these, 225 (88%) were balloon-expandable and 32 (12%) were self-expanding. No strokes were observed among the patient completing the procedure from a TFA. One patient (2%) who failed to be treated completely from a TFA and needed a bailout UEA suffered an ischemic stroke on postoperative day 2. There were 10 (15%) major access-site complications. At 1-year follow-up, overall survival was 80%, and the rate of branch instability was 6%. CONCLUSIONS: A TFA for TV cannulation is a safe and feasible option with high technical success preventing the stroke risk of UEA. Primary patency at midterm seems comparable to historical controls, and future larger studies will be needed to assess potential differences with alternative options. CLINICAL IMPACT: Using a transfemoral approach for retrograde cannulation of reno-visceral branches is feasiable, safe and effective, thereby representing a reliable alternative for BEVAR interventions.

Efficacy and Safety of Distal Radial Access for Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization (TACE) of the Liver.

BACKGROUND: The distal radial artery has emerged as an alternative vascular-access site to conventional transfemoral and transradial approaches. The main advantage over the conventional transradial route is the reduced risk of radial artery occlusion, especially in those patients who, for various clinical reasons, have to undergo repeated endovascular procedures. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of distal radial access for transcatheter arterial chemoembolization of the liver. METHODS: This investigation is a single-center retrospective analysis of 42 consecutive patients who had undergone, from January 2018 to December 2022, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization of the liver with distal radial access for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Outcome data were compared with a retrospectively constituted control group of 40 patients undergoing drug-eluting beads-transcatheter arterial chemoembolization with femoral access. RESULTS: Technical success was achieved in all cases, with a 2.4% conversion rate for distal radial access. A superselective chemoembolization was performed in 35 (83.3%) cases of distal radial access. No episode of radial artery spasm or radial artery occlusion occurred. No significant differences in efficacy and safety were observed between the distal radial access group and the femoral access group. CONCLUSIONS: Distal radial access is effective, safe, and comparable to femoral access in patients undergoing transcatheter arterial chemoembolization of the liver.

'Post-Close' Femoral Arterial Haemostasis at Endovascular Aneurysm Repair using a Dedicated Large-Bore Vascular Closure Device: A Prospective Real-World Audit.

PURPOSE: Percutaneous access for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is commonplace, with its attendant benefits. The combination of continued reduction in device profile and evolution of vascular closure device (VCD) design drives successful and safe percutaneous EVAR. A new such VCD is the MANTA Large-Bore Closure Device designed in two iterations for closure of arterial defects from 10 to 25F. We present a prospective audit of 131 large-bore femoral closures using an 'all-comers' approach to device selection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and thirty-one large-bore femoral arterial defects were analysed. Both 14F and 18F MANTA VCDs were deployed in this series as per instructions for use. Primary objectives were technical success, particularly successful deployment, and haemostasis achieved. Failures were denoted as failure to deploy; failure to achieve haemostasis was denoted as active bleeding, haematoma, or pseudoaneurysm formation requiring intervention. Later complications assessed were vessel occlusion/thrombosis or stenosis. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients (65 males and 11 females, age 75.2 ± 8.7 years) underwent a range of procedures including EVAR (n = 66), TEVAR (n = 2), and reinterventions (n = 8) requiring large-bore percutaneous femoral arterial access in 131 groins. Of these, the 14F MANTA VCD was used in 61 closures (defects ranging from 12 to 18F) and the 18F in 70 closures (defects ranging from 16 to 24F). Deployments achieved successful haemostasis in 120 (91.6%), and failures occurred in 11(8.4%) groins. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that a post-close approach using the novel MANTA Large-Bore Closure Device can be undertaken successfully to close a range of large-bore femoral arterial defects at EVAR/TEVAR with an acceptable rate of complications.

Vascular Access in Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease Undergoing TAVR: The Hostile Registry.

BACKGROUND: The optimal access route in patients with severe peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains undetermined. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare clinical outcomes with transfemoral access (TFA), transthoracic access (TTA), and nonthoracic transalternative access (TAA) in TAVR patients with severe PAD. METHODS: Patients with PAD and hostile femoral access (TFA impossible, or possible only after percutaneous treatment) undergoing TAVR at 28 international centers were included in this registry. The primary endpoint was the propensity-adjusted risk of 30-day major adverse events (MAE) defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), or main access site-related Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 major vascular complications. Outcomes were also stratified according to the severity of PAD using a novel risk score (Hostile score). RESULTS: Among the 1,707 patients included in the registry, 518 (30.3%) underwent TAVR with TFA after percutaneous treatment, 642 (37.6%) with TTA, and 547 (32.0%) with TAA (mostly transaxillary). Compared with TTA, both TFA (adjusted HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.75) and TAA (adjusted HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.47-0.78) were associated with lower 30-day rates of MAE, driven by fewer access site-related complications. Composite risks at 1 year were also lower with TFA and TAA compared with TTA. TFA compared with TAA was associated with lower 1-year risk of stroke/TIA (adjusted HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.24-0.98), a finding confined to patients with low Hostile scores (Pinteraction = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with PAD undergoing TAVR, both TFA and TAA were associated with lower 30-day and 1-year rates of MAE compared with TTA, but 1-year stroke/TIA rates were higher with TAA compared with TFA.

Educational Experience of Interventional Cardiology Fellows in the United States and Canada.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and iodinated contrast shortage may have affected interventional cardiology (IC) fellowship training. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the educational experience of first-year IC fellows in the United States and Canada. METHODS: A 59-question online survey was conducted among 2021-2022 first-year IC fellows in the United States and Canada. RESULTS: Of the 360 IC fellows invited to participate, 111 (31%) responded; 95% were from the United States, and 79% were men. Participants were mostly from university programs (70%), spent 61 to 70 hours/week in the hospital, and had an annual percutaneous coronary intervention case number of <200 (5%), 200 to 249 (8%), 250 to 349 (33%), 350 to 499 (39%), 500 to 699 (12%), or ≥700 (3%). For femoral access, a micropuncture needle was used regularly by 89% and ultrasound-guided puncture by 81%, and 43% used vascular closure devices in most cases (>80%). Intravascular ultrasound was performed and interpreted very comfortably by 62% and optical coherence tomography (OCT) by 32%, and 20% did not have access to OCT. Approximately one-third felt very comfortable performing various atherectomy techniques. Covered stents, fat embolization, and coil embolization were used very comfortably by 14%, 4%, and 3%, respectively. Embolic protection devices were used very comfortably by 11% to 24% of IC fellows. Almost one-quarter of fellows (24%) were warned about their high radiation exposure. Eighty-four percent considered IC fellowship somewhat or very stressful, and 16% reported inadequate psychological support. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights opportunities for improvement with regard to the use of intravascular imaging, atherectomy techniques, complication prevention and management strategies, radiation awareness and mitigation, and psychological support.

Ambulatory pulmonary vein isolation workflow using the Perclose ProglideTM suture-mediated vascular closure device: the PRO-PVI study.

AIMS: The leading reason for delayed discharge after pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is vascular complications. This study aimed to evaluate feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the Perclose Proglide™ suture-mediated vascular closure in ambulatory PVI, report complications, patient satisfaction, and cost of this approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients scheduled for PVI were enrolled prospectively in an observational design. Feasibility was assessed as % discharged the day of procedure. Efficacy was analysed as acute access site closure rate, time to reach haemostasis, time to ambulate, and time to discharge. Safety analysis consisted of vascular complications at 30 days. Cost analysis was reported using direct and indirect cost analysis. A 1:1 propensity matched control cohort was used for comparing time to discharge to usual workflow. Of 50 enrolled patients, 96% were discharged on the same day. 100% of devices were successfully deployed. Immediate (<1 min) haemostasis was reached in 30 patients (62.5%). Mean time to discharge was 5:48 ± 1:03 h (vs. 10:16 ± 1:21 h in the matched cohort, P < 0.0001). Patients reported high level of satisfaction with the post-operative time. No major vascular complication occurred. Cost analysis showed a neutral impact compared to the standard of care. CONCLUSION: The use of the closure device for femoral venous access after PVI led to safe discharge of patients within 6 h from the intervention in 96% of the population. This approach could minimize the overcrowding of healthcare facilities. The gain in post-operative recovery time improved patients' satisfaction and balanced the economic cost of the device.

Duplex-Guided Ipsilateral Antegrade Approach for Flush Superficial Femoral Artery Occlusion.

OBJECTIVE: Recanalization of flush ostial superficial femoral artery (SFA) occlusion is a very challenging procedure. Using the ipsilateral antegrade approach in such lesions has some difficulties. This study aimed to assess the feasibility, efficacy, and outcomes of duplex-guided ipsilateral antegrade access for endovascular treatment of atherosclerotic flush occlusion of the SFA. METHODS: This is a prospective two-center study that included chronic lower extremity ischemia patients with flush occlusion of SFA who underwent duplex-guided ipsilateral antegrade endovascular revascularization due to unfeasible contralateral femoral approach. Flush occlusions were preoperatively documented by duplex ultrasound and computed tomography angiography in all patients. The outcome measures were technical success, patency rates, perioperative morbidity and mortality, limb salvage, and amputation free survival rates. RESULTS: Between April 2019 and March 2021, 49 patients were enrolled in the current study with a mean age of 63.7 ± 5.7 years. Diabetes was the most common risk factor and was found in 40 (81.6%) patients. Associated popliteal lesions were found in seven (14.3%) patients, while 10 (20.4%) patients had combined tibial disease. Selective stenting was done in nine (18.4%) patients. Technical success was achieved in 43 (87.8%) patients. All failures were due to inability to cross the lesion rather than failure to access the common femoral artery. All complications were minor and occurred in seven (14.3%) patients. Primary, assisted primary, and secondary patency rates were 63.9% ± 7.1%, 82.8% ± 5.6%, and 93.5% ± 3.7% at 12 months, respectively. The overall 12-month limb salvage and amputation free survival rates were 91.8% and 83.3% ± 5.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Duplex-guided ipsilateral antegrade femoral access is a feasible, safe, and effective endovascular treatment option for flush SFA occlusion when contralateral femoral access is not possible.

Safety and effectiveness of vascular closure devices in interventional radiological procedures.

BACKGROUND: Although it is well known that vascular closure devices (VCD) are commonly used in therapeutic interventional radiological procedures, standard use in diagnostic procedures is not as well studied. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the real-world safety and effectiveness of the VCD in both diagnostic and therapeutic interventional radiological procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective, single center study included all patients where VCDs were used for either a diagnostic or therapeutic interventional procedure. Various demographic and clinical risk factors were recorded and examined for any significant association with successful deployment and complications. RESULTS: A total of 2072 patients were included. VCDs were successfully deployed in 95.2% of the patients with 4.8% of perioperative complications, which included minor oozing from the puncture site, small hematoma less than or equal to 5 cm, large hematoma greater than 5 cm, pain, and loss of vascular access. Therapeutic (vascular interventional radiology (VIR) and neuro-interventional radiology (NIR)) procedures (OR 3.03, 95% CI 1.51-6.09, p = 0.002), use of Angioseal (OR 5.26, 95% CI 3.13-8.33), p < 0.001), and no use of antiplatelet medications (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22-0.97, p = 0.041) were independently associated with successful deployment of VCDs when controlled for other risk factors. Smoking (OR 3.50, 95% CI 2.00-6.05, p = <0.001), use of antiplatelet (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.04-3.87, p = 0.037) and use of heparin (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.10-2.86, p = 0.018) were independently associated with higher complication rates. CONCLUSION: VCD's were successfully deployed in 95.2% of the patients with 4.8% of perioperative minor complications.