Gülmez, RecepAltunova, MehmetŞahin, Ahmet AnılÇelik, Ömer2025-04-182025-04-182025Gulmez, R., Altunova, M., Sahin, A. A., & Celik, O. (2024). A single center study of the efficacy and safety of Pro-Glide used for closure in thoracic endovascular aortic repair in patients with previous groin intervention. Vascular, 17085381241236560.17085381http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17085381241236560https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12713/6601Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Pro-Glide, a suture-mediated vascular closure device, regarding technical success and complications in patients who had undergone aortic intervention and had previous groin intervention (PGI). Methods: One hundred and thirty-five patients who underwent percutaneous thoracic endovascular aortic repair via the femoral artery and were closed with the Pro-Glide device were analyzed retrospectively. PGI was defined as a history of open surgical access to the femoral artery or wide sheath (>18 F) placement due to endovascular or valvular intervention. The patients were divided into two groups 38 cases with PGI and 97 cases without PGI. Results: The overall success rate of closure of the femoral artery with Pro-Glide was not statistically significant between the two groups (93.8% vs 92.1%, p =.711). Sheath sizes were compared between the groups and PGI (+) group had significantly higher sheath sizes compared to PGI (−) group (24.3 ± 1.1 F vs 23.8 ± 1.0 F, p =.011). Three patients in the PGI (+) group and six patients in the PGI (−) group experienced technical failure of the percutaneous femoral approach. Femoral complications were seen after the procedures in four patients in the PGI (+) group and four in the PGI (−) group. The PGI (+) group had a higher complication rate when compared to the PGI (−) group; however, this was not statistically significant (p =.181). Conclusion: The present study was conducted on a significantly larger sample compared to previous studies and the findings suggest that the Pro-Glide vascular closure device is a safe option for patients with a history of PGI and may not be considered as a contraindication. © The Author(s) 2024.eninfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessFemoral ScarPerclosePro-GlideThoracic Endovascular Aortic RepairVascular Closure DevicesArticle33110811538403595WOS:0011763500000012-s2.0-85186607093Q410.1177/17085381241236560Q2