Comparison of the cross-suture and parallel suture techniques with proglide in transfemoral TAVI: a single-center retrospective study

Şükriye Uslu; Gülsüm Meral Yılmaz Öztekin; Muhammed Rıdvan Ersoysal; Görkem Kuş; Nermin Bayar; Şakir Arslan

doi:10.32322/jhsm.1990119

Comparison of the cross-suture and parallel suture techniques with proglide in transfemoral TAVI: a single-center retrospective study

Abstract

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate vascular complications associated with the use of the ProGlide device by comparing the cross-suture technique (CST) and the parallel suture technique (PST). Methods: A total of 119 consecutive patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis who underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI) were included in this study. CST was applied by placing the sutures at the 10 and 2 o’clock positions as described by the manufacturer, whereas PST was applied at the medial and lateral positions. Vascular complications (VCs) and bleeding complications (BCs) were classified according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) criteria. Results: Minor VCs were significantly more frequent in the CST group than in the PST group (p=0.001). Regardless of the degree of vascular obstruction, the incidence was significantly lower in the PST group than in the CST group (p=0.012). Conclusion: In this single-center retrospective cohort, PST was associated with fewer minor vascular complications and less angiographic vascular obstruction compared to CST. These findings should be considered hypothesis-generating and require confirmation in larger prospective studies.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.

Ethical Statement

This study was approved by the University of Health Sciences Antalya Training and Research Hospital Clinical Researchs Ethics Committee (Date: 11.07.2024, Decision No: 10/30).

References

Pascual I, Carro A, Avanzas P, et al. Vascular approaches for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Thorac Dis. 2017;9(Suppl 6): S478-S487. doi:10.21037/jtd.2017.05.73
Sherwood MW, Xiang K, Matsouaka R, et al. Incidence, temporal trends, and associated outcomes of vascular and bleeding complications in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology transcatheter valve therapies registry. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13(1):e008227. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008227
Barbash IM, Barbanti M, Webb J, et al. Comparison of vascular closure devices for access site closure after transfemoral aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(47):3370-3379. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv417
Berti S, Bedogni F, Giordano A, et al. Efficacy and safety of ProGlide versus Prostar XL vascular closure devices in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the RISPEVA registry. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020;9(21): e018042. doi:10.1161/JAHA.120.018042
Seeger J, Gonska B, Rodewald C, Rottbauer W, Wohrle J. Impact of suture mediated femoral access site closure with the Prostar XL compared to the ProGlide system on outcome in transfemoral aortic valve implantation. Int J Cardiol. 2016;223:564-567. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.08.193
Ott I, Shivaraju A, Schaffer NR, et al. Parallel suture technique with ProGlide: a novel method for management of vascular access during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). EuroIntervention. 2017; 13(8):928-934. doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-16-01036
Marcusohn E, Qasum M, Epstein D, et al. Vascular complications among patients undergoing trans-femoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Prostar vs ProGlide parallel technique. Angiology. 2022; 73(7):635-642. doi:10.1177/00033197211058498
Toggweiler S, Leipsic J, Binder RK, et al. Management of vascular access in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: part 1: basic anatomy, imaging, sheaths, wires, and access routes. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(7):643-653. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2013.04.003

Committee VW, Généreux P, Piazza N, et al. Valve Academic Research Consortium 3: updated endpoint definitions for aortic valve clinical research. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(19):1825-1857. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.02.038
Power D, Schafer U, Guedeney P, et al. Impact of percutaneous closure device type on vascular and bleeding complications after TAVR: a post hoc analysis from the BRAVO-3 randomized trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;93(7):1374-1381. doi:10.1002/ccd.28295
van Wiechen MP, Tchetche D, Ooms JF, et al. Suture- or plug-based large-bore arteriotomy closure: a pilot randomized controlled trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;14(2):149-157. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2020.09.052
Dimitriadis Z, Scholtz W, Ensminger SM, et al. Impact of sheath diameter of different sheath types on vascular complications and mortality in transfemoral TAVI approaches using the Proglide closure device. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):e0183658. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0183658
Shoeib O, Burzotta F, Aurigemma C, et al. Percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve replacement induces femoral artery shrinkage: angiographic evidence and predictors for a new side effect. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;91(5):938-944. doi:10.1002/ccd.27248
Xiang Y, Chen C, Zhao J, Ma Y, Huang B, Wu Z. Vascular complications of ProGlide versus Prostar in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures: meta-analysis. BJS Open. 2023;7(4):zrad061. doi:10.1093/bjsopen/zrad061
Tarantini G. MANTA dedicated large-bore vessel closure device. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(7):e008203. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008203
Abdel-Wahab M, Hartung P, Dumpies O, et al. Comparison of a pure plug-based versus a primary suture-based vascular closure device strategy for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the CHOICE-CLOSURE randomized clinical trial. Circulation. 2022;145(3): 170-183. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.057856
Dumpies O, Jobs A, Obradovic D, et al. Comparison of plug-based versus suture-based vascular closure for large-bore arterial access: a collaborative meta-analysis of observational and randomized studies. Clin Res Cardiol. 2023;112(5):614-625. doi:10.1007/s00392-022-02145-5
Yeh CF, Kao HL, Ko TY, et al. Dual ProGlide vs ProGlide and Angio-Seal for femoral access hemostasis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a randomised comparative trial. Can J Cardiol. 2025;41(1): 12-20. doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2024.09.001
Rheude T, Ruge H, Altaner N, et al. Comparison of strategies for vascular ACCESS closure after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the ACCESS-TAVI randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2025;46(7):635-645. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae784
Gmeiner JMD, Linnemann M, Steffen J, et al. Dual ProGlide versus ProGlide and FemoSeal for vascular access haemostasis after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. EuroIntervention. 2022;18(10): 812-819. doi:10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00311
Ko TY, Kao HL, Liu YJ, et al. Intentional combination of ProGlide and Angio-Seal for femoral access haemostasis in transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Int J Cardiol. 2019;293:76-79. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.05.055
Kodama A, Yamamoto M, Shimura T, et al. Comparative data of single versus double proglide vascular preclose technique after percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation from the optimized catheter valvular intervention (OCEAN-TAVI) Japanese multicenter registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;90(3):E55-E62. doi:10.1002/ccd.26686
Iacovelli F, Burattini O, Sturda F, et al. Single suture-mediated closure system after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a single-center real-world experience. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2024; 103(7):1125-1137. doi:10.1002/ccd.31054
Rosseel L, Montarello NJ, Nuyens P, et al. A systematic algorithm for large-bore arterial access closure after TAVI: the TAVI-MultiCLOSE study. EuroIntervention. 2024;20(6):e354. doi:10.4244/eij-d-23-00725
Upadhaya S, Upreti A, Gupta K, et al. Vascular closure devices for large bore femoral access after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a network meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2025; 106(1):423-432. doi:10.1002/ccd.31565

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Cardiology

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Şükriye Uslu ^*
0000-0001-7504-7637
Türkiye

Gülsüm Meral Yılmaz Öztekin
0000-0001-9540-5075
Türkiye

Muhammed Rıdvan Ersoysal
0000-0002-9608-3220
Türkiye

Görkem Kuş
0000-0002-6058-5501
Türkiye

Nermin Bayar
0000-0001-6785-3137
Türkiye

Şakir Arslan
0000-0002-2907-4957
Türkiye

Publication Date

October 25, 2026

Submission Date

July 8, 2026

Acceptance Date

September 20, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 9 Number: 6

DOI

https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1990119

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA49RP93EG

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Uslu, Ş., Yılmaz Öztekin, G. M., Ersoysal, M. R., Kuş, G., Bayar, N., & Arslan, Ş. (2026). Comparison of the cross-suture and parallel suture techniques with proglide in transfemoral TAVI: a single-center retrospective study. Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine, 9(6), 1682-1688. https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1990119

AMA

1.Uslu Ş, Yılmaz Öztekin GM, Ersoysal MR, Kuş G, Bayar N, Arslan Ş. Comparison of the cross-suture and parallel suture techniques with proglide in transfemoral TAVI: a single-center retrospective study. J Health Sci Med / JHSM. 2026;9(6):1682-1688. doi:10.32322/jhsm.1990119

Chicago

Uslu, Şükriye, Gülsüm Meral Yılmaz Öztekin, Muhammed Rıdvan Ersoysal, Görkem Kuş, Nermin Bayar, and Şakir Arslan. 2026. “Comparison of the Cross-Suture and Parallel Suture Techniques With Proglide in Transfemoral TAVI: A Single-Center Retrospective Study”. Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine 9 (6): 1682-88. https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1990119.

EndNote

Uslu Ş, Yılmaz Öztekin GM, Ersoysal MR, Kuş G, Bayar N, Arslan Ş (October 1, 2026) Comparison of the cross-suture and parallel suture techniques with proglide in transfemoral TAVI: a single-center retrospective study. Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine 9 6 1682–1688.

IEEE

[1]Ş. Uslu, G. M. Yılmaz Öztekin, M. R. Ersoysal, G. Kuş, N. Bayar, and Ş. Arslan, “Comparison of the cross-suture and parallel suture techniques with proglide in transfemoral TAVI: a single-center retrospective study”, J Health Sci Med / JHSM, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 1682–1688, Oct. 2026, doi: 10.32322/jhsm.1990119.

ISNAD

Uslu, Şükriye - Yılmaz Öztekin, Gülsüm Meral - Ersoysal, Muhammed Rıdvan - Kuş, Görkem - Bayar, Nermin - Arslan, Şakir. “Comparison of the Cross-Suture and Parallel Suture Techniques With Proglide in Transfemoral TAVI: A Single-Center Retrospective Study”. Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine 9/6 (October 1, 2026): 1682-1688. https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1990119.

JAMA

1.Uslu Ş, Yılmaz Öztekin GM, Ersoysal MR, Kuş G, Bayar N, Arslan Ş. Comparison of the cross-suture and parallel suture techniques with proglide in transfemoral TAVI: a single-center retrospective study. J Health Sci Med / JHSM. 2026;9:1682–1688.

MLA

Uslu, Şükriye, et al. “Comparison of the Cross-Suture and Parallel Suture Techniques With Proglide in Transfemoral TAVI: A Single-Center Retrospective Study”. Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine, vol. 9, no. 6, Oct. 2026, pp. 1682-8, doi:10.32322/jhsm.1990119.

Vancouver

1.Şükriye Uslu, Gülsüm Meral Yılmaz Öztekin, Muhammed Rıdvan Ersoysal, Görkem Kuş, Nermin Bayar, Şakir Arslan. Comparison of the cross-suture and parallel suture techniques with proglide in transfemoral TAVI: a single-center retrospective study. J Health Sci Med / JHSM. 2026 Oct. 1;9(6):1682-8. doi:10.32322/jhsm.1990119