Health  Vol.5 No.3 , March 2013
Femoral sheath removal after cardiac catheterization in the Jordanian hospitals: An explorative study

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the methods of sheath removal (femostop, compressor and manual compression) among Jordanian patients post cardiac catherization. Material and Methods: A descriptive explorative design utilized to collect data from 87 patients underwent cardiac catherization. Data collected on demographics, health remarks and complication pre and post cardiac catherization and in relation to sheath removal methods and complications. Results: The majority of the patients (94.2%, n = 80) had a manual sheath removal compared to 1% (n = 1) compression and 7% (n = 6) had femostop method. Kruskal-Wallis H test revealed there were significance difference in PTT and ACT reports in relation to type of procedures (0.24, p 0.015; 0.32, p = 0.005 respectively). However, there were no significant differences between methods of sheath removal methods in relation to pain level, MAP before, MAP after, and heart rate with p value > 0.05. Patient’s age had negative association with HR after the procedure (BTAU = -0.19, p = 0.02), while no significant differences found in post catherization complication (hematoma and pain level) and all other health remarks (p > 0.05) in regards to patients’ age and gender. Moreover, patients’ MAP readings were significantly different in relation to number of rest hour that patients had post cardiac catherization (p = 0.049). Conclusion: The study found that most patients and health professionals preferred manual removal methods of sheath post cardiac catherization. Cardiac health professionals, has to consider health remarks and demographic characteristics of their patients when planning care for their patients and more research needed to explore these issues.

Cite this paper: Haj-Hassan, A. , Hamdan-Mansour, A. , Zeilani, R. and Nabolsi, M. (2013) Femoral sheath removal after cardiac catheterization in the Jordanian hospitals: An explorative study. Health, 5, 426-431. doi: 10.4236/health.2013.53057.

[1]   Berry, C., Kelly, J., Cobbe, S.M. and Eteiba, H. (2004) Comparison of femoral bleeding complications after coronary angiography versus percutaneous coronary intervention. American Journal of Cardiology, 94, 361-363.

[2]   Zeller, T., Frank, U., Muller, C., Burgelin, K., Sinn, L., Bestehorn, H.P., Cook-Bruns, N. and Neumann, F. (2003) Predictors of improved renal function after percutaneous stent-supported angioplasty of severe atherosclerotic os- tial renal artery stenosis. Circulation, 108, 2244-2249. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000095786.44712.2A

[3]   Lehmann, K.G., Heath-Lange, S.J. and Ferris, S.T. (1999) Randomized comparison of homeostasis techniques after invasive cardiovascular procedures. American Heart Journal, 138, 1118-1125. doi:10.1016/S0002-8703(99)70078-5

[4]   Capasso, V., Conder, C., Meuller, G. and Bouvier, S. (2006) Peripheral arterial sheath removal program: A performance improvement initiative. Journal of Vascular Nursing, 24, 127-132. doi:10.1016/j.jvn.2006.09.001

[5]   Peet, G.I., McGrath, M.A., Brunt, J.H. and Hilton, J.D. (1995) Femoral arterial sheath removal after PTCA: A cross-Canada survey. Canadian Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 6, 13-19.

[6]   Jones, T. and Mccutcheon, H. (2003) A randomized controlled trial comparing to obtain homeostasis following coronary angiography. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, 19, 11-20. doi:10.1016/S0964-3397(03)00005-3

[7]   Benson, L., Wunderly, D., Perry, B., Kabboord, J., Wenk, T., Birdsall, B., Vanderbos, L., Roach, V., Goole, R., Crippen, C., Nyirenda, T., Rumsey, L. and Manguba, G. (2005) Determining best practice: Comparison of three methods of femoral sheath Removal after cardiac interventional procedures. Heart & Lung, 34, 115-121. doi:10.1016/j.hrtlng.2004.06.011

[8]   Nordrehaug, J.E., Chronos, N.A., Priestley, K.A., Buller, N.P. and Foran, J. (1996) Randomized evaluation of an inflatable femoral artery compression device. Journal of Interventional Cardiology, 9, 381-387. doi:10.1111/j.1540-8183.1996.tb00645.x

[9]   Kussmaul, W.G., Buchbinder, M., Whitlow, P.L., Aker, U.T., Heuser, R.R., King, S.B., Kent, K.M., Leon, M.B., Kolansky, D.M. and Sandza, G.G. (1995) Rapid arterial hemostasis and decreased access site complications after cardiac catheterization and angioplasty: Results of a randomized trial of a novel hemostatic device. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 25, 1685-1692. doi:10.1016/0735-1097(95)00101-9

[10]   King, N., Philpott, S. and Leary, A.B. (2008) A randomized controlled trial assessing the use of compression versus vasoconstriction in the treatment of femoral hematoma occurring after percutaneous coronary intervenetion. Heart & Lung, 37, 205-210. doi:10.1016/j.hrtlng.2007.05.008

[11]   Pracyk, J.B., Wall, T.C., Longabaugh, J.P., Frank, D., Tice, F.D., Hochrein, J., Green, C., Cox, G., Lee, K., Stack, R.S. and Tcheng, J.E. (1998) A randomized trial of vascular hemostasis techniques to reduce femoral vascular complications after coronary intervention. American Journal of Cardiology, 81, 970-976. doi:10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00074-5

[12]   Kugelmass, A.D., Cohen, D.J., Brown, P.P., Simon, A.W., Becker, E.R. and Culler, S.D. (2006) Hospital resources consumed in treating complications associated with per-cutaneous coronary interventions. American Journal of Cardiology, 97, 322-327. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.08.047

[13]   Weitz, J.I., Hirsh, J. and Samama, M.M. (2008) American College of Chest Physicians. New antithrombotic drugs: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (8th Edition). Chest, 133, 234S-256S.

[14]   Hoeper, M., Lee, S., Voswinckel, R., Palazzini, M., Jais, X., Marinelli, A., et al. (2006) Complications of right heart catheterization procedures in patients with pulmonary hypertension in experienced centers. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 48, 2546-2552. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2006.07.061