Routine Ultrasonography Guidance for Femoral Vascular Access for Cardiac Procedures: The UNIVERSAL Randomized Clinical Trial

Comparison of ultrasound- versus fluoroscopy-guidEd femorAl access In tranS-catheter aortic valve replacement In the Era of contempoRary devices: The EASIER registry

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications (VCs) still represent one of the principal concerns of trans-femoral trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR). New-generation devices can minimize such complications but the arterial access management is left to the operator's choice. This study aims to describe the rate of VCs in a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices and to determine whether an ultrasound-guided (USG) vs. a fluoroscopy-guided (FG) femoral access management has an impact on their prevention.

METHODS

This is a prospective, observational, multicenter study. Consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices were analyzed from January 2022 to October 2022 in five tertiary care centers. Femoral accesses were managed according to the operator's preferences. All the patients underwent a pre-discharge peripheral ultrasound control. VCs and bleedings were the main endpoints of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 458 consecutive patients were enrolled (274 in the USG group and 184 in the FG group). VCs occurred in 6.5 % of the patients (5.2 % minor and 1.3 % major). There was no difference between the USG and the FG groups in terms of any VCs (7.3 % vs. 5.4 %; p = 0.4), or any VARC-3 bleedings (6.9 % vs 6 %, p = 0.9). At logistic regression analysis, the two guidance strategies did not result as predictors of VCs (odds Ratio 0.8, 95 % Confidence Interval 0.46-1.4; P = 0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices, the occurrence of VCs is low and mostly represented by minor VCs. USG and FG modalities did not affect the rate of VCs.

The radiographic relationship of the femoral head, inguinal ligament, and common femoral artery bifurcation for optimal vascular access

Objective

Common femoral artery (CFA) access is commonly used for endovascular interventions. Access site complications contribute to significant morbidity and mortality. This study characterizes the radiographic variability in the relationship of the femoral head, the inguinal ligament, and the CFA bifurcation, to identify the zone of optimal CFA access.

Methods

Human cadaver dissection of the inguinal ligament and CFA bifurcation was performed. The inguinal ligament and CFA bifurcation were marked with radiopaque pins and plain anteroposterior radiographs were obtained. Radiographic measurements of the femoral head length, the distance of the top of the femoral head to the inguinal ligament, and to the CFA bifurcation were obtained. Results were reported as percentage of femoral head covered by the inguinal ligament or the CFA bifurcation relative to the top of the femoral head. A heatmap was derived to determine a safe access zone between the inguinal ligament and CFA bifurcation.

Results

Forty-five groin dissections (male, n = 20; female, n = 25) were performed in 26 cadavers. The mean overlap of the inguinal ligament with the femoral head was 11.2 mm (range, -19.4 to 27.4 mm). There were no age (<85 vs ≥85 years) or sex-related differences. In 82.6% of cadaveric CFA exposures, there was overlap between the inguinal ligament and femoral head (mean, 27.7%; range, -85.7% to 70.1%), with 55.6% having a >25% overlap. In 11.1%, there was an overlap between the lower one-third of the femoral head and the CFA bifurcation. Cumulatively, heatmap analysis depicted a >80% likelihood of avoiding the inguinal ligament and CFA bifurcation below the midpoint of the femoral head.

Conclusions

Significant variability exists in the relationship between the inguinal ligament, CFA bifurcation, and the femoral head, suggesting the lack of a consistently safe access zone. The safest access zone in >80% of patients lies below the radiographic midpoint of the femoral head and the inferior aspect of the femoral head.

A proposed modern standardized technical approach for symptomatic chronic carotid total occlusion management

Chronic carotid total occlusion (CCTO) is a known cause of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack. Symptomatic CCTO is associated with up to 30% risk of recurrent ischemic stroke, despite optimal medical treatment. Notably, a randomized controlled trial reported that previous surgical management did not improve the overall prognosis of these patients. Endovascular treatment of CCTO has been proposed as a feasible strategy to re-establish cerebral perfusion in symptomatic patients. However, its use is controversial and not supported by evidence from randomized clinical trials. Recently, a meta-analysis reported a reasonably high procedural success without an excess periprocedural complication rate, but several steps are needed before the procedure is mature enough to be tested in randomized controlled trials. This review highlights the developments in the endovascular recanalization of CCTO and emphasizes key steps towards standardizing the procedure.

Strategies to Minimize Access Site-related Complications in Patients Undergoing Transfemoral Artery Procedures with Large-bore Devices

Large bore accesses refer to accesses with a diameter of 10 French or greater and are necessary for various medical devices, including those used in transcatheter aortic valve replacement, endovascular aneurysm repair stent-grafts, and percutaneous mechanical support devices. Notably, the utilization of these devices via femoral access is steadily increasing due to advancements in technology and implantation techniques, which are expanding the pool of patients suitable for percutaneous procedures. However, procedures involving large bore devices carry a high risk of bleeding and vascular complications (VCs), impacting both morbidity and long-term mortality. In this review article, we will first discuss the incidence, determinants, and prognostic impact of VCs in patients undergoing large bore access procedures. Subsequently, we will explore the strategies developed in recent years to minimize VCs, including techniques for optimizing vascular puncture through femoral cannulation, such as the use of echo-guided access cannulation and fluoroscopic guidance. Additionally, we will evaluate existing vascular closure devices designed for large bore devices. Finally, we will consider new pharmacological strategies aimed at reducing the risk of periprocedural access-related bleeding.

Ultrasound guidance for transfemoral access in coronary procedures: an individual participant-level data metaanalysis from the femoral ultrasound trialist collaboration

BACKGROUND

Randomised controlled trials of ultrasound (US)-guided transfemoral access (TFA) for coronary procedures have shown mixed results.

AIMS

We aimed to compare US-guided versus non-US-guided TFA from randomised data in an individual participant-level data (IPD) meta-analysis.

METHODS

We completed a systematic review and an IPD meta-analysis of all randomised controlled trials comparing US-guided versus non-US-guided TFA for coronary procedures. We performed a one-stage mixed-model meta-analysis using the intention-to-treat population from included trials. The primary outcome was a composite of major vascular complications or major bleeding within 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 2,441 participants (1,208 US-guided, 1,233 non-US-guided) from 4 randomised clinical trials were included. The mean age was 65.5 years, 27.0% were female, and 34.5% underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention. The incidence of major vascular complications or major bleeding (34/1,208 [2.8%] vs 55/1,233 [4.5%]; odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-0.94; p=0.026) was lower in the US-guided TFA group. In the prespecified subgroup of participants who received a vascular closure device, those randomised to US-guided TFA experienced a reduction in the primary outcome (2.1% vs 5.6%; OR 0.36, 95% CI: 0.19-0.69), while no benefit for US guidance was observed in the subgroup without vascular closure devices (4.1% vs 3.3%; OR 1.21, 95% CI: 0.65-2.26; interaction p=0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

In participants undergoing coronary procedures by TFA, US guidance decreased the composite outcome of major vascular complications or bleeding and may be especially helpful when using vascular closure devices.

Randomized trial of an oblique versus standard fluoroscopic-guided micropuncture technique for femoral arterial access: The Micropuncture-CFA trial

BACKGROUND

The anterior-posterior fluoroscopic guidance (the AP technique) is a standard method for common femoral artery (CFA) access, but the rate of CFA access with ultrasound vs. the AP technique was not significantly different. We have shown an oblique fluoroscopic guidance (the oblique technique) with a micropuncture needle (MPN) resulted in CFA access in 100 % of patients. The outcome of the oblique vs. AP technique is unknown. We compared the utilities of the oblique vs. AP technique for CFA access with a MPN in patients undergoing coronary procedures.

METHODS

A total of 200 patients were randomized to the oblique vs. AP technique. Using the oblique technique, a MPN was advanced to the mid pubis in the 20° ipsilateral right-or left anterior oblique view with fluoroscopic guidance and the CFA was punctured. In the AP technique, a MPN was advanced to the mid femoral head in the AP view with fluoroscopic guidance and the CFA was punctured. The primary endpoint was the rate of successful access to the CFA.

RESULTS

The rates of first pass and CFA access were higher with the oblique vs. AP technique (82 % vs. 61 %, and 94 % vs. 81 %, respectively; P < 0.01). The number of needle punctures was lower with the oblique vs. AP technique (1.1 ± 0.39 vs. 1.4 ± 0.78, respectively; P < 0.01). In high CFA bifurcations, the rate of CFA access was higher with the oblique vs. AP technique (76 % vs. 52 %, respectively; P < 0.01). Vascular complications were lower with the oblique vs. AP technique (1 % vs. 7 %, respectively; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that the oblique technique, compared with the AP technique, significantly increased the rates of first pass and access to the CFA, and decreased the number of punctures and vascular complication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03955653.

Ultrasound Guidance for Vascular Access for Coronary Angiogram: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Obtaining vascular access during percutaneous coronary intervention is necessary to facilitate the procedure but carries procedural risks that impact patient outcomes. Historically, vascular access has been accomplished using anatomic landmarks, pulsation, and/or fluoroscopic guidance. Ultrasound (US) guidance has emerged as a modality for achieving vascular access in a multitude of interventional procedures including those in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. US use has been demonstrated in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses to be associated with an increased success rate for vascular access with fewer complications, although the data are mixed. We aimed to re-evaluate the totality of evidence in an updated meta-analysis to compare the ease of access and complications rates between US-guided and manual vascular access. A meta-analysis of 8 randomized controlled trials including 5,170 patients was performed. The primary outcome evaluated was the rate of access failure, and the secondary outcomes included hematomas and access site bleeding. US-guided arterial access was associated with a significantly higher rate of first-attempt success and a decreased risk of venipuncture. US use had a trend toward a lower total number of attempts, but the results were not significant. This updated meta-analysis further supports the use of US for vascular access for coronary angiography because of higher rates of first-attempt success and reduced venipuncture. However, there was no significant difference in vascular complications such as hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, and bleeding complications. Because of the high morbidity of bleeding complications associated with coronary angiography, further research should be done to reduce these complications.

Vascular Access in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Chronic Total Occlusions: A State-of-the-Art Review

The outcomes of chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention have considerably improved during the last decade with continued emphasis on improving procedural safety. Vascular access site bleeding remains one of the most frequent complications. Several procedural strategies have been implemented to reduce the rate of vascular access site complications. This state-of-the-art review summarizes and describes the current evidence on optimal vascular access strategies for chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention.

Ultrasound-Guided Femoral Vascular Access for Percutaneous Coronary and Structural Interventions

Radial access has largely substituted femoral access for coronary interventions. Nevertheless, the femoral artery remains indispensable for gaining access to structural and complex percutaneous coronary interventions such as transcatheter aortic valve implantation and chronic total occlusion interventions, respectively. Ultrasound-guided femoral puncture is a broadly available, inexpensive, and relatively easy-to-learn technique. According to the existing evidence, ultrasound guidance for gaining femoral access has improved the effectiveness and safety of the technique. In the present paper, we sought to review the current literature in order to provide the reader with up-to-date data regarding the benefits of ultrasound-guided femoral access compared with the conventional technique as well as describing the state-of-the-art technique for gaining femoral access under ultrasound guidance.

Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2022: A Summary of Key Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

Over the course of 2022, numerous key clinical trials with valuable contributions to clinical cardiology were published or presented at major international conferences. This review seeks to summarise these trials and to reflect on their clinical context.

METHODS

The authors reviewed clinical trials presented at major cardiology conferences during 2022, including the American College of Cardiology (ACC), European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EuroPCR), European Society of Cardiology (ESC), Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics (TCT), American Heart Association (AHA), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), TVT-The Heart Summit (TVT) and Cardiovascular Research Technologies (CRT). Trials with a broad relevance to the cardiology community and those with potential to change current practice were included.

RESULTS

A total of 93 key cardiology clinical trials were identified for inclusion. Interventional cardiology data included trials evaluating the use of new generation novel stent technology and new intravascular physiology strategies such as quantitative flow ratio (QFR) to guide revascularisation in stable and unstable coronary artery disease. New trials in acute coronary syndromes and intervention focused on long-term outcomes of optimal medical therapy (OMT), revascularisation in ischaemic dysfunction and left main (LM) intervention. Structural intervention trials included latest data on optimal timing and anticoagulation strategies in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), in addition to expanding evidence in mitral and tricuspid valve interventions. Heart failure data included trials with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, iron replacement and novel drugs such as omecamtiv. Prevention trials included new data on proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and polypill strategies. In electrophysiology, new data regarding optimal timing of ablative therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) in addition to novel screening strategies were evaluated.

CONCLUSION

This article presents a summary of key clinical cardiology trials published and presented during the past year and should be of interest to both practising clinicians and researchers.

Ultrasound-guided femoral access in patients with vascular closure devices: a prespecified analysis of the randomised UNIVERSAL trial

BACKGROUND

Whether ultrasound (US)-guided femoral access compared to femoral access without US guidance decreases access site complications in patients receiving a vascular closure device (VCD) is unclear.

AIMS

We aimed to compare the safety of VCD in patients undergoing US-guided versus non-US-guided femoral arterial access for coronary procedures.

METHODS

We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the UNIVERSAL trial, a multicentre randomised controlled trial of 1:1 US-guided femoral access versus non-US-guided femoral access, stratified for planned VCD use, for coronary procedures on a background of fluoroscopic landmarking. The primary endpoint was a composite of major Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3 or 5 bleeding and vascular complications at 30 days.

RESULTS

Of 621 patients, 328 (52.8%) received a VCD (86% ANGIO-SEAL, 14% ProGlide). In patients who received a VCD, those randomised to US-guided femoral access compared to non-US-guided femoral access experienced a reduction in major bleeding or vascular complications (20/170 [11.8%] vs 37/158 [23.4%], odds ratio [OR] 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.82). In patients who did not receive a VCD, there was no difference between the US- and non-US-guided femoral access groups, respectively (20/141 [14.2%] vs 13/152 [8.6%], OR 1.76, 95% CI: 0.80-4.03; interaction p=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients receiving a VCD after coronary procedures, US-guided femoral access was associated with fewer bleeding and vascular complications compared to femoral access without US guidance. US guidance for femoral access may be particularly beneficial when VCD are used.

Outcomes of Patients Treated with Blood Transfusion in a Contemporary Tertiary Care Medical Center Intensive Cardiac Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Acutely ill patients treated with blood transfusion (BT) have unfavorable prognoses. Nevertheless, data regarding outcomes in patients treated with BT admitted into a contemporary tertiary care medical center intensive cardiac care unit (ICCU) are limited. The current study aimed to assess the mortality rate and outcomes of patients treated with BT in a modern ICCU.

METHODS

Prospective single center study where we evaluated mortality, in the short and long term, of patients treated with BT between the period of January 2020 and December 2021 in an ICCU.

OUTCOMES

A total of 2132 consecutive patients were admitted to the ICCU during the study period and were followed-up for up to 2 years. In total, 108 (5%) patients were treated with BT (BT-group) during their admission, with 305 packed cell units. The mean age was 73.8 ± 14 years in the BT-group vs. 66.6 ± 16 years in the non-BT (NBT) group, p < 0.0001. Females were more likely to receive BT as compared with males (48.1% vs. 29.5%, respectively, p < 0.0001). The crude mortality rate was 29.6% in the BT-group and 9.2% in the NBT-group, p < 0.0001. Multivariate Cox analysis found that even one unit of BT was independently associated with more than two-fold the mortality rate [HR = 2.19 95% CI (1.47-3.62)] as compared with the NBT-group, p < 0.0001]. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted for multivariable analysis and showed area under curve (AUC) of 0.8 [95% CI (0.760-0.852)].

CONCLUSIONS

BT continues to be a potent and independent predictor for both short- and long-term mortality even in a contemporary ICCU, despite the advanced technology, equipment and delivery of care. Further considerations for refining the strategy of BT administration in ICCU patients and guidelines for different subsets of high-risk patients may be warranted.

[TAVR : Imaging for an optimal femoral approach]

Both computed tomography (CT) angiography and vascular ultrasound have a major role before and during a transfemoral approach to TAVR. CT angiography will determine whether the patient is eligible for a femoral approach. Peri-procedural arterial ultrasound will be helpful to improve safety and optimize results during the femoral approach. Being able to interpret both of these imaging modalities is of paramount importance for any interventional cardiologist who practices structural interventions.