Haftungsausschluss: Diese Website bündelt öffentlich verfügbare Daten aus offiziellen Quellen wie FDA, ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed und SEC EDGAR nur zur allgemeinen Information. Sie stellt keine medizinische Beratung, Diagnose, Behandlungsempfehlung oder Anlageberatung dar.

Klinische Studie

STEP: Proglide® Versus Femoseal®: A Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Arterial Closure Devices Following Endovascular Peripheral Arterial Procedures

NCT: NCT03192033 · COMPLETED

NCT-IDNCT03192033
Medizinische Daten: StatusCOMPLETED
Startdatum2017-12-04
Abschluss2019-06-25
SponsorNantes University Hospital (OTHER)
First posted
Last updated

Kurzzusammenfassung

Over the past years, arterial closure systems have tended to replace manual compression to ensure hemostasis at femoral artery puncture points. Arterial closure systems reduce hemostasis and patient immobilization times, thus enabling early resumption of walking. These devices have contributed extensively to the development of outpatient stays for cardiology, vascular and neuro-radiology procedures. However, main arterial closure devices use different technology to close the arterial puncture point. For some, hemostasis is achieved by sealing the arteriotomy between two discs (an inner and an outer). For others, they are designed to close puncture sites delivering a single monofilament polypropylene suture mediated by needles. The investigators hypothesis is based on a different efficacy between both arterial closure devices for peripheral arterial disease (PAD) patients.

Offizielle Quelle

Auf ClinicalTrials.gov ansehen →

Daten aus der ClinicalTrials.gov-API. Den aktuellsten Status finden Sie im offiziellen Eintrag.

↑