Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing Manta device and Perclose device for closure of large bore arterial access

Abstract

Data comparing MANTA device with Perclose device for large bore arterial access closure is limited. We performed meta-analysis to compare safety and efficacy of the two devices in large (⩾14 Fr sheath) arteriotomy closure post-TAVR. Relevant studies were identified via PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases until June, 2022. Data was analyzed using random effect model to calculate relative odds of VARC-2 defined access-site complications and short-term (in-hospital or 30-day) mortality. A total of 12 studies (2 RCT and 10 observational studies) comprising 2339 patients were included. The odds of major vascular complications (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.51–1.92; p = 0.98); life threatening and major bleeding (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.45–1.33; p = 0.35); minor vascular complications (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.63–2.99; p = 0.43); minor bleeding (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.57–1.56; p = 0.82); device failure (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.49–1.11; p = 0.14); hematoma formation (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.33–1.75; p = 0.52); dissection, stenosis, occlusion, or pseudoaneurysm (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.71–1.62; p = 0.73) and short-term mortality (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.55–1.84; p = 0.98) between both devices were similar. MANTA device has a similar efficacy and safety profile compared to Perclose device.