Grier D, Hartnell G. Percutaneous femoral artery puncture: practice and anatomy. Br J Radiol. 1990; 63(752):602–4. Epub 1990/08/01. doi: 10.1259/0007‐1285‐63‐752‐602. PubMed PMID: 2400874.13 13 Yun SJ, Nam DH, Ryu JK. Femoral artery access using the US‐determined inguinal ligament and femoral head as reliable landmarks: prospective study of usefulness and safety. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015; 26(4):552–9. Epub 2015/03/05. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2014.12.613. PubMed PMID: 25735827.
14 14 Seto AH, Abu‐Fadel MS, Sparling JM, et al. Real‐time ultrasound guidance facilitates femoral arterial access and reduces vascular complications: FAUST (Femoral Arterial Access With Ultrasound Trial). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010; 3(7):751–8. Epub 2010/07/24. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.04.015. PubMed PMID: 20650437.
15 15 Burzotta F, Shoeib O, Aurigemma C, Trani C. Angio‐Guidewire‐Ultrasound (AGU) Guidance for Femoral Access in Procedures Requiring Large Sheaths. J Invasive Cardiol. 2019; 31(2):E37–E9. Epub 2019/02/01. PubMed PMID: 30700629.
16 16 Ambrose JA, Lardizabal J, Mouanoutoua M, et al. Femoral micropuncture or routine introducer study (FEMORIS). Cardiology. 2014; 129(1):39–43. Epub 2014/07/12. doi: 10.1159/000362536. PubMed PMID: 25012707.
17 17 Pracyk JB, Wall TC, Longabaugh JP, et al. A randomized trial of vascular hemostasis techniques to reduce femoral vascular complications after coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 1998; 81(8):970–6. Epub 1998/05/12. doi: 10.1016/s0002‐9149(98)00074‐5. PubMed PMID: 9576155.
18 18 Semler HJ. Transfemoral catheterization: mechanical versus manual control of bleeding. Radiology. 1985; 154(1):234–5. Epub 1985/01/01. doi: 10.1148/radiology.154.1.3880610. PubMed PMID: 3880610.
19 19 Bogart MA. Time to hemostasis: a comparison of manual versus mechanical compression of the femoral artery. Am J Crit Care. 1995; 4(2):149–56. Epub 1995/03/01. PubMed PMID: 7749448.
20 20 Benson LM, Wunderly D, Perry B, et al. Determining best practice: comparison of three methods of femoral sheath removal after cardiac interventional procedures. Heart Lung. 2005; 34(2):115–21. Epub 2005/03/12. doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2004.06.011. PubMed PMID: 15761456.
21 21 Ormiston JA, Shaw BL, Panther MJ, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention with bivalirudin anticoagulation, immediate sheath removal, and early ambulation: a feasibility study with implications for day‐stay procedures. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2002; 55(3):289–93. Epub 2002/03/01. doi: 10.1002/ccd.10125. PubMed PMID: 11870930.
22 22 Koch KT, Piek JJ, de Winter RJ, et al. Two hour ambulation after coronary angioplasty and stenting with 6 F guiding catheters and low dose heparin. Heart. 1999; 81(1):53–6. Epub 1999/04/30. doi: 10.1136/hrt.81.1.53. PubMed PMID: 10220545; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC1728893.
23 23 Koch KT, Piek JJ, de Winter RJ, et al. Early ambulation after coronary angioplasty and stenting with six French guiding catheters and low‐dose heparin. Am J Cardiol. 1997; 80(8):1084–6. Epub 1997/11/14. doi: 10.1016/s0002‐9149(97)00609‐7. PubMed PMID: 9352984.
24 24 Vlasic W, Almond D, Massel D. Reducing bedrest following arterial puncture for coronary interventional procedures‐‐impact on vascular complications: the BAC Trial. J Invasive Cardiol. 2001; 13(12):788–92. Epub 2001/12/04. PubMed PMID: 11731689.
25 25 Patel MR, Jneid H, Derdeyn CP, et al. Arteriotomy closure devices for cardiovascular procedures: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2010; 122(18):1882–93. Epub 2010/10/06. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e3181f9b345. PubMed PMID: 20921445.
26 26 Hoffer EK, Bloch RD. Percutaneous arterial closure devices. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003; 14(7):865–85. Epub 2003/07/09. doi: 10.1097/01.rvi.0000071086.76348.8e. PubMed PMID: 12847195.
27 27 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):3370–9. Epub 2015/09/01. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv417. PubMed PMID: 26314688.
28 28 Seeger J, Gonska B, Rodewald C, et al. 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; 223:564–7. Epub 2016/08/26. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.08.193. PubMed PMID: 27561160.
29 29 Hermiller JB, Simonton C, Hinohara T, et al. The StarClose Vascular Closure System: interventional results from the CLIP study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006; 68(5):677–83. Epub 2006/10/14. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20922. PubMed PMID: 17039508.
30 30 Van Mieghem NM, Latib A, van der Heyden J, et al. Percutaneous Plug‐Based Arteriotomy Closure Device for Large‐Bore Access: A Multicenter Prospective Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017; 10(6):613–9. Epub 2017/03/25. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.12.277. PubMed PMID: 28335899.
31 31 Van Den Berg JC. A close look at closure devices. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2006; 47(3):285–95. Epub 2006/06/09. PubMed PMID: 16760865.
32 32 Nader RG, Garcia JC, Drushal K, Pesek T. Clinical evaluation of SyvekPatch in patients undergoing interventional, EPS and diagnostic cardiac catheterization procedures. J Invasive Cardiol. 2002; 14(6):305–7. Epub 2002/06/04. PubMed PMID: 12042620.
33 33 Applegate RJ, Sacrinty MT, Kutcher MA, et al. Propensity score analysis of vascular complications after diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention using thrombin hemostatic patch‐facilitated manual compression. J Invasive Cardiol. 2007; 19(4):164–70. Epub 2007/04/04. PubMed PMID: 17404401.
34 34 Najjar SF, Healey NA, Healey CM, et al. Evaluation of poly‐N‐acetyl glucosamine as a hemostatic agent in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization: a double‐blind, randomized study. J Trauma. 2004; 57(1 Suppl):S38–41. Epub 2004/07/29. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000136749.20063.f0. PubMed PMID: 15280750.
35 35 Palmer BL, Gantt DS, Lawrence ME, et al. Effectiveness and safety of manual hemostasis facilitated by the SyvekPatch with one hour of bedrest after coronary angiography using six‐French catheters. Am J Cardiol. 2004; 93(1):96–7. Epub 2003/12/31. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2003.08.077. PubMed PMID: 14697477.
36 36 Tavris DR, Gallauresi BA, Lin B, et al. Risk of local adverse events following cardiac catheterization by hemostasis device use and gender. J Invasive Cardiol. 2004; 16(9):459–64. Epub 2004/09/09. PubMed PMID: 15353824.
37 37 Prouse A, Gunzburger E, Yang F, et al. Contemporary Use and Outcomes of Arterial Closure Devices After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020; 9(4):e015223. Epub 2020/02/18. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.015223. PubMed PMID: 32063086; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC7070201.
38 38 Sohail MR, Khan AH, Holmes DR, Jr., et al. Infectious complications of percutaneous vascular closure devices. Mayo Clin Proc. 2005; 80(8):1011–5. Epub 2005/08/12. doi: 10.4065/80.8.1011. PubMed PMID: 16092579.
39 39 Koreny M, Riedmuller E, Nikfardjam M, et al. Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterization: systematic review and meta‐analysis. JAMA. 2004; 291(3):350–7. Epub 2004/01/22. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.3.350. PubMed PMID: 14734598.
40 40 Nikolsky E, Mehran R, Halkin A, et al. Vascular complications associated with arteriotomy closure devices in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures: a meta‐analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44(6):1200–9. Epub 2004/09/15. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.06.048. PubMed PMID: 15364320.
41 41 Vaitkus PT. A meta‐analysis of percutaneous vascular closure devices after diagnostic catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention. J Invasive
