Commentary

Further Exploration into the Comparative Study of Vascular Complications Post-arterial Sheath Removal

subsection

I am writing in response to the recent article, “Comparison of Vascular Complications after Arterial Sheath Removal using Manual Compression Method and ClampEase Method in Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography” by Kazemi Darafshani et al published in your esteemed journal.¹ The study provides valuable insights into the post-procedural management of patients undergoing coronary angiography. However, I wish to highlight certain aspects that warrant further exploration for a more comprehensive understanding of this subject.

Critical Areas for Further Investigation

Pain and Patient Satisfaction

The study primarily focuses on the incidence of physical complications like hemorrhage and hematoma. However, the subjective experiences of patients, such as pain and overall satisfaction with the procedure, are equally crucial. Pain management and patient comfort play a pivotal role in the recovery process and can significantly influence the choice of method for arterial sheath removal.²

Future studies should include a qualitative analysis of patient feedback on discomfort levels and overall satisfaction with the procedure. This would provide a more holistic view of the effectiveness of the ClampEase device compared to manual compression.

Cost-Benefit Analysis

The current study highlights the ClampEase method’s potential to reduce vascular complications and hasten hemostasis. However, an in-depth cost-benefit analysis would be highly beneficial. This analysis should consider the cost of the ClampEase device, the potential reduction in hospital stay duration, and the implications for healthcare resource allocation.³

Such an analysis would be invaluable for healthcare administrators and policymakers, aiding in the decision-making process for the adoption of new medical devices and procedures. It would also offer insights into the financial impact of adopting the ClampEase method in various healthcare settings, especially in resource-constrained environments.

Long-term Outcomes and Broader Patient Demographics

Additionally, examining the long-term outcomes associated with both methods would add depth to the study. Understanding how these methods fare over time in preventing complications is crucial for validating their sustained efficacy.²

Extending the study to include a more diverse patient population across multiple geographic locations would enhance the generalizability of the findings and provide a global perspective on the preferred method for arterial sheath removal.

The study by Kazemi Darafshani et al is an important step towards improving post-operative care in coronary angiography. However, incorporating aspects like patient pain, satisfaction, and a detailed cost-benefit analysis would significantly augment the value of this research. These additions would not only offer a comprehensive view of the methods’ efficacy but also guide healthcare providers in making informed decisions that are both clinically effective and economically viable. I appreciate the opportunity to provide these insights and look forward to future studies that build upon this important work.

Competing Interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Ethical Approval

Ethical approval.

References

1. Kazemi Darafshani J, Hosseini SA, Babaei S, Khosravi Farsani A. Comparison of vascular complications after arterial sheath removal using manual compression method and ClampEase method in patients undergoing coronary angiography. J Caring Sci 2023; 12(4):235-40. doi: 10.34172/jcs.2023.30700 [Crossref] [ Google Scholar]
2. Cox T, Blair L, Huntington C, Lincourt A, Sing R, Heniford BT. Systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing manual compression to vascular closure devices for diagnostic and therapeutic arterial procedures. Surg Technol Int 2015; 27:32-44. [ Google Scholar]
3. Pracyk JB, Wall TC, Longabaugh JP, Tice FD, Hochrein J, Green C. A randomized trial of vascular hemostasis techniques to reduce femoral vascular complications after coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol 1998; 81(8):970-6. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00074-5 [Crossref] [ Google Scholar]