Original Studies Comparative Data of Single Versus Double ProGlide Vascular Preclose Technique After Percutaneous Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation From the Optimized CathEter vAlvular iNtervention (OCEAN-TAVI) Japanese Multicenter Registry Atsuko Kodama, 1 MD, Masanori Yamamoto, 1,2 * MD, Tetsuro Shimura, 1 MD, Ai Kagase, 1 MD, Yutaka Koyama, 1 MD, Norio Tada, 3 MD, Kensuke Takagi, 4 MD, Motoharu Araki, 5 MD, Futoshi Yamanaka, 6 MD, Shinichi Shirai, 7 MD, Yusuke Watanabe, 8 MD, and Kentaro Hayashida, 9 MD Objectives: This study aimed to assess the feasibility of percutaneous arterial access site closure after percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI) using single versus double Perclose ProGlide devices. Backgrounds: Al- though suturing with the preclose technique has been widely adopted during TF-TAVI, the optimal vascular closure strategy is still under debate. Methods: Data from 279 patients who underwent TF-TAVI, obtained from the Optimized CathEter vAlvular iNter- vention (OCEAN-TAVI) Japanese multicenter registry. Technical, procedural, and clinical outcomes were compared between the single ProGlide group (n 5 99) and double Pro- Glide group (n 5 180). They were also analyzed by propensity adjusted matching model (single [n 5 69] vs. double [n 5 69]). All patients were treated through a 16-Fr to 20-Fr eSheath. Technical success of the closure device was defined as hemostasis not re- quiring alternative invasive treatment. Access site-related vascular complications, bleedings, and other procedural complications were defined according to the Valvular Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) criteria. Results: The rates of technical success and access site-related vascular complications were similar in the 2 groups (94.9% vs. 91.6%, p 5 0.44; 5.0% vs. 7.7%, p 5 0.54, respectively). The prevalence of bleeding complications did not differ between the 2 groups (1.0% vs. 3.3%, p 5 0.43). 1 Department of Cardiology, Toyohashi Heart Canter Japan, Toyohashi 2 Department of Cardiology, Nagoya Heart Canter Japan, Nagoya 3 Department of Cardiology, Sendai Kousei Hospital, Sendai, Japan 4 Department of Cardiology, New Tokyo Hospital, Chiba, Japan 5 Department of Cardiology, Saiseikai Yokohama City Eastern Hospital, Yokohama, Japan 6 Department of Cardiology, Syonan Kamakura General Hospital, Kanagawa, Japan 7 Department of Cardiology, Kokura Memorial Hospital, Kokura, Japan 8 Department of Cardiology, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan 9 Department of Cardiology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan Conflict of interest: Dr. Yamamoto, Dr. Koyama, Dr. Tada, Dr. Araki, Dr. Shirai, Dr. Watanabe, and Dr. Hayashida are clinical proctors for Edwards Lifesciences. *Correspondence to: Masanori Yamamoto, Department of cardiolo- gy, Toyohashi Heart Canter, Toyohashi, Japan, 21-1 Gohuntori, Oyamachyo, Toyohashi, Aichi 441-8530, Japan. E-mail: yamamoto@ heart-center or Jp masa-nori@nms.ac.jp Received 6 May 2016; Revision accepted 3 July 2016 DOI: 10.1002/ccd.26686 Published online 00 Month 2016 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) V C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 00:00–00 (2016)