Overview of Vascular Closure Devices: Indications, Categories, and Complications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Minimally invasive endovascular procedures are essential in modern medicine, and to achieve hemostasis postprocedure, manual compression (MC) is the gold standard. Unfortunately it has many drawbacks, including patient discomfort as well as significant observation time postprocedure which increases costs. Vascular closure devices (VCD) address these concerns and the literature indicates they improve patient satisfaction and decrease time to discharge. Regarding complications, VCD's introduce the risk of limb ischemia and groin infections, though have similar complication rates to MC. These devices are prevalent in office based and hospital settings given the aforementioned benefits. Despite the advantages, there are many clinicians that do not use VCDs, owing to either unfamiliarity, concern for complications and costs. There is great diversity among VCDs, and it is helpful to classify them from their mechanisms of action. These categories include: (1) suture-mediated, (2) mechanical, (3) sealant-based (4) stainless steel-based, and (5) manual compression assistance devices. VCDs offer a valuable alternative to manual compression, and with new VCDs emerging (CELT), this presentation hopes to inform about the mechanisms for each VCD, advantages/disadvantages, contraindications, as well as preventing/managing complications. Educational Points: Discuss the various categories of vascular closure devices (VCDs) and their mechanisms. Review the indications/contraindications of vascular closure devices. Overview complications for VCDs and how to best prevent/manage them. Publication History Article published online: 02 April 2024 © 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".