top of page

February 11, 2017


Predictive Factors for Additional ProGlide Deployment in Percutaneous Endovascular Aortic Repair

Shen-Yen Lin, MD, Sin-Yi Lyu, MD, Ta-Wei Su, MD, Sung-Yu Chu, MD

, Chien-Ming Chen, MD, Chien-Fu Hung, MD

, Chee-Jen Chang, PhD, Po-Jen Ko MD



To evaluate outcomes and predictive factors for additional ProGlide device deployment in percutaneous endovascular aortic repair (PEVAR) with the preclose technique.

Materials and Methods

Clinical data of patients who underwent PEVAR with the preclose technique from February 2012 to January 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 268 patients (229 men, 39 women) who underwent PEVAR (thoracic endovascular aortic repair [TEVAR], n = 113; endovascular abdominal aortic repair [EVAR], n = 152; simultaneous TEVAR and EVAR, n = 3) with 418 femoral access sites were enrolled. The mean age of the patients was 69 years ± 14. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictive factors associated with additional ProGlide device deployment.


Primary technical success with adequate hemostasis and two ProGlide devices was 87.6%, and 48 femoral arterial access sites (11.5%) required additional ProGlide device deployment. The secondary technical success rate was 99.0%. Four femoral access sites (1.0%) needed surgical repair. Anterior wall calcification near the arteriotomy increased the risk of additional ProGlide device deployment (adjusted odds ratio, 6.19; 95% confidence interval, 2.81–13.64; P < .001), whereas larger sheath size, common femoral artery (CFA) diameter, and depth from the skin to the arteriotomy did not.


Additional ProGlide device deployment reduces the rate of surgical repair after primary hemostasis failure in PEVAR. Anterior CFA wall calcification is a significant predictor for additional ProGlide device deployment.



Please reload

bottom of page