SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.6 issue1The MANTA vascular closure device in transfemoral TAVI: a real-world cohortUse of a pediatric risk score for cardiac catheterization in a Spanish population with congenital heart disease author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


REC: Interventional Cardiology

On-line version ISSN 2604-7276Print version ISSN 2604-7306

Abstract

GRAZINA, André et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation via percutaneous alternative access routes: outcomes. REC Interv Cardiol ES [online]. 2024, vol.6, n.1, pp.13-19.  Epub Mar 18, 2024. ISSN 2604-7276.  https://dx.doi.org/10.24875/recic.m23000389.

Introduction and objectives:

Transfemoral access is globally accepted as the preferential access route for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, in up to 15% of the patients, this access is considered inadequate. Considering the various alternatives available, the fully percutaneous access routes have been chosen preferentially. This analysis aims to compare outcomes and complications of 3 alternative access routes for transfemoral, trans-subclavian and transcaval TAVI.

Methods:

Retrospective analysis of patients referred for TAVI using transfemoral, trans-subclavian, and transcaval accesses in a single tertiary center from 2008 through 2021. The primary endpoints were 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality rates. The secondary endpoints were technical success, residual moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak, major vascular complication, 30-day stroke, 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) major bleeding, and 30-day acute kidney injury (AKIN criteria 2 or 3).

Results:

A total of 642 TAVIs were performed (601 transfemoral, 24 trans-subclavian, and 10 transcaval). A total of 7 patients treated via transapical access were excluded. As expected, baseline comorbidities like left ventricular dysfunction, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, and previous stroke were more frequent in the non-femoral groups. The 1-year and 30-day all-cause mortality rates were higher in the non-transfemoral population (HR, 2.88 and HR, 3.53, respectively). The rates of 30-day stroke and acute kidney injury (AKIN 2 or 3) were also significantly lower in transfemoral patients, but similar between trans-subclavian and transcaval patients. The rates of 30-day major bleeding showed a statistically significant tendency towards lower rates in the transfemoral group. The rates of technical success, major vascular complications, and residual moderate or severe perivalvular leak were similar among the 3 groups.

Conclusions:

After careful selection, transfemoral access is the preferential access route for TAVI procedures. In intermediate surgical risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis, non-transfemoral TAVI approaches have poorer outcomes. The worse outcomes of percutaneous alternative access routes are partially associated with worse baseline characteristics.

Keywords : Transcatheter aortic valve implantation; Transfemoral; Trans-subclavian; Transcaval.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in English | Spanish     · English ( pdf ) | Spanish ( pdf )