Triple antiplatelet therapy does not increase femoral access bleeding with vascular closure devices

Background The use of arteriotomy closure devices (CDs) to achieve hemostasis after femoral artery access in percutaneous coronary intervention is steadily increasing. However, the safety information with these devices in the era of triple antiplatelet therapy is limited. Methods We reviewed prospectively collected data from the Do Tirofiban and ReoPro Give Similar Efficacy Outcomes Trial (TARGET), where all patients received aspirin, clopidogrel, and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor therapy. At the treating physician's discretion, manual compression (MC) or a vascular hemostasis device was selected following femoral angiography. Patients receiving MC were to have sheaths removed 2 to 6 hours postprocedure when the activated clotting time was less than or equal to 175 seconds. Results Of 4809 patients, 4736 had femoral access, and 985 of these had a CID (Perclose 47%, Angio-Seal 43%, VasoSeal 5%, and other 5%). The MC and CID groups were similar regarding most demographic characteristics, including age, systolic blood pressure, and weight, but those with MC were more often female, diabetic, and had history of peripheral vascular disease. Patients with a CID had a lower ischemic event rate suggesting they were a lower risk cohort overall. There were no differences in major bleeding at the access site (0.4% vs 0.5%, P = .588), minor bleeding at the access site (1.9% vs. 3.1%, P = .142) or transfusions (0.8% vs 1.0%, P = .513) between the MC and CD groups, respectively. Conclusions In contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention practice, with appropriate patient selection, a CD can be safely utilized despite aggressive polypharmacy for procedural anticoagulation.