Fascia suture technique compared with a suture-mediated closure device for femoral arterial closure after endovascular aortic repair
| ISRCTN | ISRCTN68739781 |
|---|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN68739781 |
| Protocol serial number | N/A |
| Sponsor | Örebro University Hospital (Sweden) |
| Funder | Örebro University Hospital (Sweden) |
- Submission date
- 02/12/2013
- Registration date
- 27/01/2014
- Last edited
- 10/04/2015
- Recruitment status
- No longer recruiting
- Overall study status
- Completed
- Condition category
- Surgery
Plain English summary of protocol
Background and study aims
An endovascular aneurysm is a bulge in a blood vessel that is caused by a weakness in the blood vessel wall, usually where it branches. Percutaneous access (access to inner organs via needle-puncture of the skin) for endovascular aneurysm repair (called P-EVAR) using a suture-mediated closure device was first described in 1999. P-EVAR has gained great interest as it may reduce surgery time and decrease time to recovery. However, suture-mediated closure devices increase the procedural cost. The fascia suture technique (FST) was described in 1997 and was first evaluated by our group in 2006. The aim of this study was to investigate whether FST reduces the time and cost of the procedure in comparison to pre-suturing using the Prostar XL percutaneous Vascular Surgical system.
Who can participate?
Patients planned for abdominal endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for aneurysm or dissection.
What does the study involve?
Participants are randomly allocated to one of two groups:
1. Intervention group: patients will have a fascia suture for access closure
2. Control group: patients will have the Prostar access closure
What are the possible benefits and risks of participating?
The two methods to be compared have been used for several years in routine treatment. These methods have shown a high success rate and severe complications have been rare. Patients are not expected to be at greater risk than if they had not been involved in the study. Improved care through more systematic monitoring was considered as one of the potential benefits for the patients.
Where is the study run from?
The study is run from Örebro University Hospital and Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden.
When is the study starting and how long is it expected to run for?
The recruitment started in June 2006 and the last patient was enrolled in May 2009. The last follow-up took place in December 2009.
Who is funding the study?
Örebro University Hospital, Sweden.
Who is the main contact?
Dr Thomas Larzon
thomas.larzon@orebroll.se
Contact information
Scientific
Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery
Örebro University Hospital
Örebro
SE-70185
Sweden
| Phone | +46 (0)19 602 10 00 |
|---|---|
| thomas.larzon@orebroll.se |
Study information
| Primary study design | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Study design | Randomised two-centre trial |
| Secondary study design | Randomised controlled trial |
| Study type | Participant information sheet |
| Scientific title | Randomized two-centre trial to investigate whether the fascia suture technique (FST) can reduce access closure time and procedural costs in comparison to the Prostar technique (Prostar) in patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair and to evaluate the short- and mid-term outcome of both techniques |
| Study objectives | It was hypothesised that that the fascia suture technique could reduce access closure time and procedural costs in comparison to the Prostar technique in patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair. |
| Ethics approval(s) | Regional Ethical Review Board, regional ethical committee, Uppsala, 07/09/2005, ref.:Dnr 2005:144 |
| Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied | Improving surgical performance |
| Intervention | Participants are randomised to one of the following two groups: 1. Intervention group: patients having a fascia suture for access closure 2. Control group: patients having the Prostar access closure |
| Intervention type | Procedure/Surgery |
| Primary outcome measure(s) |
Current primary outcome measures as of 18/06/2014: |
| Key secondary outcome measure(s) |
Current secondary outcome measures as of 18/06/2014: |
| Completion date | 10/12/2009 |
Eligibility
| Participant type(s) | Patient |
|---|---|
| Age group | Adult |
| Sex | All |
| Target sample size at registration | 100 |
| Key inclusion criteria | 1. All patients planned for abdominal endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for aneurysm or dissection 2. Planned femoral access 3. Planned for at least 16 F outer diameter of introducer or stent graft system on the main access site |
| Key exclusion criteria | 1. Aorto-uni-iliac stentgrafts with femoro-femoral bypass 2. Femoral aneurysm 3. Ruptured aneurysms 4. Emergency operations without preoperative ultrasound 5. Ongoing anticoagulation treatment with warfarin |
| Date of first enrolment | 07/06/2006 |
| Date of final enrolment | 01/05/2009 |
Locations
Countries of recruitment
- Sweden
Study participating centre
SE-70185
Sweden
Results and Publications
| Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to share | No |
|---|---|
| IPD sharing plan summary | Not provided at time of registration |
| IPD sharing plan |
Study outputs
| Output type | Details | Date created | Date added | Peer reviewed? | Patient-facing? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Results article | results | 01/02/2015 | Yes | No | |
| Participant information sheet | Participant information sheet | 11/11/2025 | 11/11/2025 | No | Yes |
