To overcome the challenge associated with achievement in hemostasis after a catheterization procedure, a suture-based closure device was compared with manual compression in a 600-patient randomized trial. The major study end points included the incidence of vascular complications and the time to ambulation after the procedure. The study included diagnostic or interventional procedures. The suture-mediated closure was performed immediately after the procedure independent of the anticoagulation level, whereas manual compression was performed per hospital protocol with sheath removal relying on normalization of patient's anticoagulation status. A significant reduction in time to achieve hemostasis (7.8 +/- 4.8 vs 19.6 +/- 13.2 minutes, p <0001) and time to ambulation (4.5 +/- 6.5 vs 17.8 +/- 5 hours, p <0001) was associated with use of the suture-mediated closure device. The incidence of vascular complications was similar in the overall population (5.7% for suturing device vs 11.3% for compression) or in the interventional patient subset (8.4% for suturing device vs 9.6% for compression). There was a significant reduction in the incidence of vascular complications in the diagnostic procedure subset (4.4% for suturing device vs 12.1% for compression, p <0.05). Thus, the use of a suture-mediated closure device represents a safe alternative to manual compression. Hemostasis and ambulation can be achieved faster with the suturing device than with manual compression, with a potential reduction in access site complications.