Rapid pacing using the left ventricular guidewire: Reviving an old technique to simplify BAV and TAVI procedures

Upper extremity versus lower extremity for secondary access during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: rationale and design of the randomised TAVI XS trial

BACKGROUND

During transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), secondary access is required for angiographic guidance and temporary pacing. The most commonly used secondary access sites are the femoral artery (angiographic guidance) and the femoral vein (temporary pacing). An upper extremity approach using the radial artery and an upper arm vein instead of the lower extremity approach using the femoral artery and femoral vein may reduce clinically relevant secondary access site-related bleeding complications, but robust evidence is lacking.

TRIAL DESIGN

The TAVI XS trial is a multicentre, randomised, open-label clinical trial with blinded evaluation of endpoints. A total of 238 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI will be included. The primary endpoint is the incidence of clinically relevant bleeding (i.e. Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding) of the randomised secondary access site (either diagnostic or pacemaker access, or both) within 30 days after TAVI. Secondary endpoints include time to mobilisation after TAVI, duration of hospitalisation, any BARC type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding, and early safety at 30 days according to Valve Academic Research Consortium‑3 criteria.

CONCLUSION

The TAVI XS trial is the first randomised trial comparing an upper extremity approach to a lower extremity approach with regard to clinically relevant secondary access site-related bleeding complications. The results of this trial will provide important insights into the safety and efficacy of an upper extremity approach in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI.

Left versus right ventricular pacing during TAVR and balloon aortic valvuloplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

While right ventricular pacing (RVP) is the conventional temporary pacing modality used for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), this approach possesses inherent risks and procedural challenges. We aim to assess and compare the safety and efficacy of left ventricular pacing (LVP) and RVP during TAVR and balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV).

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted in four databases from inception to December 15th, 2023. We included observational studies and clinical trials comparing LVP with RVP during TAVR and BAV procedures. Primary outcomes included short-term mortality, mortality due to cardiac tamponade, and procedural complications including bleeding, vascular complications, and cardiac tamponade. Secondary outcomes comprised procedure duration and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Five studies involving 830 patients with RVP and 1577 with LVP were included. Short-term mortality was significantly higher in the RVP group (RR 2.32, 95% CI: [1.37-3.93], P = .002), as was the incidence of cardiac tamponade (RR 2.19, 95% CI: [1.11-4.32], P = .02). LVP demonstrated shorter hospital stays (MD = 1.34 d, 95% CI: [0.90, 1.78], P < .001) and reduced procedure duration (MD = 7.75 min, 95% CI: [5.08, 10.41], P < .00001) compared to RVP. New pacemaker implantation was higher in the RVP group (RR 2.23, 95% CI: [1.14, 4.39], P = .02).

CONCLUSION

LVP during TAVR and BAV emerges a safer alternative to RVP, offering reduced mortality, hospital stays, and procedure durations.

Safety and Efficacy of TAVR With a Pressure Sensor and Pacing Guidewire: SAFE-TAVI Trial

BACKGROUND

The SavvyWire (OpSens Inc) is a 0.035-inch preshaped guidewire with dedicated pacing properties and a distal pressure sensor allowing for continuous hemodynamic pressure monitoring.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine the efficacy and safety of the guidewire during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures.

METHODS

This prospective, multicenter clinical study included patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR in 8 European centers. The primary efficacy endpoint was defined as effective left ventricular rapid pacing runs with the guidewire translating into a significant systemic pressure drop (below 60 mm Hg). The safety outcome included the absence of major procedural complications related to the guidewire.

RESULTS

A total of 121 patients (mean age: 82.2 ± 5.9 years, 50% women) were included in the study, and 119 (98.3%) patients were finally treated with the study device. A balloon-expandable valve was implanted in 45 (37.8%) patients. Predilatation and postdilatation were performed in 89 (74.8%) and 14 (11.8%) patients, respectively. The primary efficacy endpoint was achieved in 116 (98.3%) patients, and the mean aortic systolic arterial pressure achieved during rapid pacing was 46.6 ± 11.3 mm Hg. Hemodynamic assessment with the use of the OptoMonitor 3 (OpSens Inc) without additional catheter exchange was achieved in 117 (99.2%) patients. The safety endpoint was achieved in 117 (99.2%) patients. No procedural mortality, stroke, or ventricular perforation was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the guidewire during TAVR procedures appeared to be efficacious and safe. This device could help minimize interventions during the procedure and improve the clinical decision making after transcatheter heart valve deployment. (SavvyWire Efficacy and Safety in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Procedures [SAFE-TAVI]; NCT05492383).

Best Practices in Left Ventricular Pacing for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is continually evolving, with a recent emphasis on a "minimalist" approach toward reducing procedural invasiveness, duration, and recovery time. Whereas a better understanding of the relationship between TAVR and new conduction disturbances has led to improved periprocedural management, intraprocedural rapid-pacing techniques have not evolved beyond traditional right ventricular temporary pacing. An alternative strategy utilizing the left ventricular guidewire for rapid pacing has been developed with evidence supporting its safety, effectiveness, and potential reductions in procedure time and cost. This review will outline the current best practices in left ventricular pacing for TAVR, a practical technique that embraces the minimalist approach to TAVR and may be considered for routine use. It aims to explore the current evidence and combine this with expert opinion to offer a strategy for temporary pacing that encourages efficiencies for physicians and patients without compromising periprocedural safety.

Direct wire pacing during measurement of fractional flow reserve: A randomized proof-of-concept noninferiority crossover trial

Background

Adenosine administration for fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement may induce heart pauses.

Aims

To assess the accuracy and tolerability of direct wire pacing (DWP) during measurement of FFR.

Methods

Adults with at least one intermediate coronary artery stenosis (40%-80%) were consecutively enrolled between June 2021 and February 2022 in this randomized, noninferiority, crossover trial (NCT04970082) carried out in France. DWP was applied (DWP) or not (standard method) through the pressure guidewire used for FFR measurement during adenosine-induced maximal hyperaemia. Subjects were randomly assigned to the allocation sequence (DWP first or standard first). A 2-minute washout period was observed between the two FFR measurements performed for each stenosis. The primary endpoint was the reproducibility of FFR measurements between methods.

Results

A total of 150 focal lesions, presented by 94 subjects, were randomized (ratio: 1:1). The FFR values obtained with each method were nearly identical (R = 0.98, p = 0.005). The mean FFR difference of 0.00054 (95% confidence interval: 0.004 to 0.003) showed the noninferiority of FFR measurement with DWP vs. that with the standard method. Higher levels of chest discomfort were reported with DWP than with the standard method (0.61 ± 0.84 vs. 1.05 ± 0.89, p < 0.001), and a correlation was observed between the electrical sensations reported with DWP and chest discomfort (p < 0.001). Pauses (n = 20/148 lesions) were observed with the standard method, but did not correlate with chest discomfort (p = 0.21). No pauses were observed with DWP.

Conclusions

DWP during FFR measurement resulted in accurate and reproducible FFR values, and eliminated the pauses induced by adenosine.

Reducing cardiac tamponade caused by temporary pacemaker perforation in transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Cardiac tamponade caused by temporary right ventricular (RV) pacemaker perforation is a rare but serious complication in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

AIMS

To study the incidence of temporary pacemaker related cardiac tamponade in TAVR, and the relation to the type of pacemaker lead used in periprocedural temporary transvenous pacing.

METHODS

A single center registry of transfemoral TAVRs in 2014-2020. Main inclusion criterion was peri-operative use of a temporary RV pacing lead. Main exclusion criteria were a preoperatively implanted permanent pacemaker or the exclusive use of left ventricular guidewire pacing. Incident cardiac tamponade was classified as pacemaker lead related, or other. Patients were grouped according to type of temporary RV pacing wire.

RESULTS

810 patients were included (age 80.5 ± 7.3 [mean ± standard deviation], female 319, 39.4%). Of these, 566 (69.9%) received a standard RV temporary pacing wire (RV-TPW), and 244 (30.1%) received temporary RV pacing through a permanent, passive pacemaker lead (RV-TPPL). In total, 18 (2.2%) events of cardiac tamponade occurred, 12 (67%) were pacemaker lead related. All pacemaker lead-related cardiac tamponades occurred in the group who received a standard RV-TPW and none in the group who received RV-TPPL (n = 12 [2.1%] vs. n = 0 [0%], p = 0.022). No difference in cardiac tamponade due to other causes was seen between the groups (p = 0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of soft-tip RV-TPPL was associated with a lower risk of pacemaker related cardiac tamponade in TAVR. When perioperative pacing is indicated, temporary RV-TPPL may contribute to a significant reduction of cardiac tamponade in TAVR.

A direct wire pacing device for transcatheter heart valve and coronary interventions: a first-in-human, multicentre study of the Electroducer Sleeve

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and complex percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) may require cardiac pacing during device delivery, generally requiring the insertion of a temporary pacing lead via an additional venous access site. The purpose-built Electroducer Sleeve device provides direct wire pacing without the need for a temporary venous pacemaker.

AIMS

This study assessed the safety of temporary cardiac pacing using the novel sleeve device during PCI.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, non-randomised, prospective, first-in-human, single-arm, pilot study. The primary endpoint was analysis of a safety outcome, defined as the occurrence of haematomas or bleeding complications at the device vascular access site. Secondary endpoints included analyses of effectiveness and qualitative outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixty patients (mean age: 77.9±9.6 years) from 4 centres in France were included: 39 (65%) underwent TAVI, and 21 (35%) underwent PCI. Procedures were performed using the sleeve with access through the radial (32 patients; 53.3%) or femoral arteries (26; 43.3%), or the femoral vein (2; 3.3%). Primary endpoint analysis revealed that 2 patients (3.3%) developed EArly Discharge After Transradial Stenting of CoronarY Arteries Study (EASY) grade I/Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type I haematomas at the device access site. As a measure of effectiveness, a haemodynamic effect was observed after each spike delivery in 54 patients (90%). Analyses of other secondary endpoints showed that 2 patients (6.3%) presented asymptomatic radial artery occlusion. No allergies were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This first-in-human trial using the Electroducer Sleeve indicated that this novel, purpose-built, temporary pacing device was safe and effective. Larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.

New Practices in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: How I Do It in 2023

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) went through a huge evolution in the last decades. Previously performed under general anesthesia, with transoperative transesophageal echocardiography guidance and using cutdown femoral artery access, the procedure has now evolved into a minimalist approach, with local anesthesia, conscious sedation, and the avoidance of invasive lines becoming the new standards. Here, we discuss the minimalist TAVI approach and how we incorporate it into our current clinical practice.

Sex-Specific Considerations in Degenerative Aortic Stenosis for Female-Tailored Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation Management

The impact of sex on pathophysiological processes, clinical presentation, treatment options, as well as outcomes of degenerative aortic stenosis remain poorly understood. Female patients are well represented in transfemoral aortic valve implantation (TAVI) trials and appear to derive favorable outcomes with TAVI. However, higher incidences of major bleeding, vascular complications, and stroke have been reported in women following TAVI. The anatomical characteristics and pathophysiological features of aortic stenosis in women might guide a tailored planning of the percutaneous approach. We highlight whether a sex-based TAVI management strategy might impact on clinical outcomes. This review aimed to evaluate the impact of sex from diagnosis to treatment of degenerative aortic stenosis, discussing the latest evidence on epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical presentation, therapeutic options, and outcomes. Furthermore, we focused on technical sex-oriented considerations in TAVI including the preprocedural screening, device selection, implantation strategy, and postprocedural management.

Comparison of left ventricular with right ventricular rapid pacing on tamponade during TAVI

BACKGROUND

Small studies have suggested left ventricular (LV) rapid pacing has similar safety and efficacy to conventional right ventricular (RV) rapid pacing in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, there are limited data on the comparative rates of tamponade. The study compared the rate of cardiac tamponade between LV and RV-pacing during TAVI.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2021, 1226 consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral or transaxillary TAVI were included. 470(38.3%) patients had TAVI deployment with RV-pacing and 756(61.7%) with LV-pacing. The primary outcome was the frequency and cause of cardiac tamponade. Secondary outcomes included efficacy, procedure duration and crossover rates.

RESULTS

There was a trend to less tamponade with LV-pacing, which did not reach statistical significance [11(2.3%) vs 11(1.5%);P = 0.27]. There was no significant difference in the frequency of tamponade due to annular tear [4(0.9%) vs 9(1.2%);P = 0.59] or LV free-wall perforation [1(0.2%) vs 2(0.3%);P = 0.86]. The frequency of tamponade due to RV perforation was significantly lower in the LV-pacing group [0 vs 6(2.3%);P < 0.005)]. Two patients with tamponade due to RV perforation required emergency sternotomy of whom one died. Deployment success was similar (99% vs 99.6%;P=NS). Procedure duration was shorter with LV-pacing (70 vs 80 mins;P < 0.005). Crossover to RV-pacing was low (0.9%). There were no embolizations caused by loss-of-capture in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

LV-pacing appears equally efficacious and is associated with a lower risk of tamponade due to RV perforation caused by the temporary pacing wire. LV-pacing was not associated with an increased risk of tamponade due to LV free-wall perforation.

The Wattson temporary pacing guidewire for transcatheter heart valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation and implantation of other transcatheter heart valves, generally requires insertion of a temporary venous pacemaker. Implantation of a temporary venous pacemaker adds complexity, time and risk to the procedure. Guidewire modification to allow pacing is increasingly popular, however it requires technical expertise and provides unipolar pacing resulting in high thresholds and potential capture loss. The Wattson temporary pacing guidewire is a novel device which offers guidewire support for valve delivery and concomitant bipolar pacing. It may offer a safe and effective solution to guidewire pacing for transcatheter aortic valve implantation and other transcatheter heart valve implantations. Herein, we review the literature surrounding left ventricular guidewire pacing along with the features and clinical data of the Wattson wire.

Insights in a restricted temporary pacemaker strategy in a lean transcatheter aortic valve implantation program

OBJECTIVES

To study the safety and feasibility of a restrictive temporary-RV-pacemaker use and to evaluate the need for temporary pacemaker insertion for failed left ventricular (LV) pacing ability (no ventricular capture) or occurrence of high-degree AV-blocks mandating continuous pacing.

BACKGROUND

Ventricular pacing remains an essential part of contemporary transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). A temporary-right-ventricle (RV)-pacemaker lead is the standard approach for transient pacing during TAVI but requires central venous access.

METHODS

An observational registry including 672 patients who underwent TAVI between June 2018 and December 2020. Patients received pacing on the wire when necessary, unless there was a high-anticipated risk for conduction disturbances post-TAVI, based on the baseline-ECG. The follow-up period was 30 days.

RESULTS

A temporary-RV-pacemaker lead (RVP-cohort) was inserted in 45 patients, pacing on the wire (LVP-cohort) in 488 patients, and no pacing (NoP-cohort) in 139 patients. A bailout temporary pacemaker was implanted in 14 patients (10.1%) in the NoP-cohort and in 24 patients (4.9%) in the LVP-cohort. One patient in the LVP-cohort needed an RV-pacemaker for incomplete ventricular capture. Procedure time was significantly longer in the RVP-cohort (68 min [IQR 52-88.] vs. 55 min [IQR 44-72] in NoP-cohort and 55 min [IQR 43-71] in the LVP-cohort [p < 0.005]). Procedural high-degree AV-block occurred most often in the RVP-cohort (45% vs. 14% in the LVP and 16% in the NoP-cohort [p ≤ 0.001]). Need for new PPI occurred in 47% in the RVP-cohort, versus 20% in the NoP-cohort and 11% in the LVP-cohort (p ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSION

A restricted RV-pacemaker strategy is safe and shortens procedure time. The majority of TAVI-procedures do not require a temporary-RV-pacemaker.

Mechanical Complications of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Mechanical complications after transcatheter aortic valve replacement are fortunately rare with the current generation of devices. Unfortunately, life-threatening complications will occur and it is the responsibility of operators to be familiar with strategies to prevent and manage these challenging scenarios. Because these cases will not occur often, it is important for us to highlight and talk about those that do occur, to learn best practices in how to manage and prevent them going forward. We can learn much from each other's good crash landings.

Comparison of left ventricular pacing performance among pre-shaped guidewires designed for transfemoral-approach transcatheter aortic valve implantation

TAVI is an established therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Rapid or control pacing is necessary for TAVI, and most centers are familiar with right ventricular (RV) pacing. Although there are several reports on the efficacy and safety of LV pacing, they are still few. In addition, LV pacing has not been studied for different LV guidewires. Our aim is to study the effectiveness of left ventricular (LV) pacing and the thresholds of LV guidewires in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We retrospectively analyzed 252 consecutive patients who underwent trans-femoral TAVI (TF-TAVI) with LV pacing in our institute between December 2017 and November 2020. We excluded 48 patients from the total cohort due to TAVI with RV pacing, and the remaining 204 patients were analyzed (52 males, mean age 85 ± 5 years). Among them, 202 patients (99.0%) had successful LV pacing. In the two patients with failed LV pacing, SAFARI2™ Small was used. The CONFIDA™ group (n = 34) showed a significantly lower threshold than the SAFARI2™ group (n = 163) (median 3.0 vs. 5.0 V; P = 1.1 × 10^-7). LV pacing with Lunderquist® was successful in all patients (n = 7). LV pacing in TAVI was an effective and safe strategy. CONFIDA™ wire may be particularly well suited for LV pacing in TAVI.

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty through the novel transradial technique

BACKGROUND

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) has been typically performed through a femoral approach thus increasing the risk of bleeding and access site-related vascular complications. The aim of this study was to describe the safety and efficacy of transradial aortic valve valvuloplasty (TRBAV).

METHODS

The present research is a retrospective, single-center study including patients undergoing TRBAV (October 2019-July 2020). BAV was performed using 18-25 mm balloons through an 8-10 French (F) radial sheath. Successful BAV was defined as ≥50% reduction in peak-to-peak gradient (efficacy endpoint). Procedural complications, including radial artery occlusion (RAO) at follow-up were evaluated (safety endpoint).

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients underwent TRBAV were included, aged 81 (73-85) years, 70% males, EuroScoreII 3.1 (2.1-5.5). Aortic valve gradient was significantly reduced (pre-50±24 vs. 18.7±13 mmHg post, P<0.001), and 91% had successful BAV. Mean gradient drop was 31.4±16.8 mmHg. One patient (4%) required cross-over to femoral access for severe vasospasm and was excluded from the analysis. Most used sheaths were 8F (46%) and 9F (37%), mostly for 20 mm (50%) and 23 mm (38%) balloons. There were neither major procedural complications (neither balloon entrapment nor compartmental syndrome) nor minor complications (any access-site bleeding). RAO was observed in 2 patients (8%), both asymptomatic.

CONCLUSIONS

TRBAV was safe, feasible, and efficacious with a small rate of conversion and RAO, suggesting reproducibility of this novel technique. TRBAV may represent an alternative to femoral access in selected patients although larger studies are warranted.

Pacing Over the Guidewire in Cardiac Structural Intervention: A Practical Guide

Left ventricular access for aortic valve intervention provides the opportunity to deliver rapid pacing over the guidewire for device positioning and deployment. Temporary pacing delivered via the left ventricle can obviate the need for venous access and has been shown to be a safe alternative to temporary right ventricular pacing. The technique requires some basic knowledge and experience in temporary cardiac pacing. We outline safe practical steps and common pitfalls in using this technique.

Direct Rapid Left Ventricular Wire Pacing during Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty

Background: Rapid ventricular pacing is mandatory for optimal balloon positioning during aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) in patients with severe aortic stenosis. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of direct left ventricular (LV) guidewire pacing in comparison with regular pacing induced by temporary pacemaker (PM) placement in the right ventricle. Methods: Direct rapid LV pacing was provided with a 0.035″ guidewire. Baseline clinical characteristics, echocardiographic and procedural data, as well as complication rates, were compared between the two groups. Results: A total of 202 patients undergoing BAV were enrolled (49.5% with direct LV guidewire pacing). The pacing success rate was 100%. In the direct LV guidewire pacing group, we found a lower radiation dose, shorter fluoroscopy and overall procedural time (0.16 vs. 0.28 Gy, p = 0.02; 5.4 vs. 10.3 min, p = 0.01; 17 vs. 25 min, p = 0.01; respectively). In addition, the complication rate was lower in that group (cardiac tamponades, vascular access site complications, blood transfusions rate, and in-hospital mortality: 0% vs. 3.9%; 4.0% vs. 15.7%; 2.0% vs. 12.7%; 2.0% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.01 for all, respectively). Conclusions: Direct rapid LV guidewire pacing is a simple, safe and effective option for BAV with a reduced complication rate compared to a temporary PM placed in the right ventricle.

Transcoronary Rapid Pacing Solving a Complex Retrograde Chronic Total Occlusion Procedure

We report a case of revascularization of the right coronary artery via the epicardial collateral, for which we used transcoronary rapid pacing to obtain cardiac standstill while puncturing the distal chronic total occlusion (CTO) cap. To our knowledge, this is the first case in which this technique has been used in CTO. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.)

Using the Arm for Structural Interventions: Case Selection or Wave of the Future

The transradial approach has emerged as the preferred alternative to the traditional transfemoral approach owing to the increased evidence of its safety and efficacy. The field of structural heart disease is rapidly evolving; however, periprocedural complications related to access site remain a major determinant of morbidity and mortality. The transradial approach as primary or secondary access site in structural heart interventions like transcatheter aortic valve replacement, balloon aortic valvuloplasty, alternative access, alcohol septal ablations, paravalvular leak, valve snaring, coronary protection, and ventricular septal defect is feasible, safe, with lower vascular complications and high procedural success.

[TAVI simplification: A focus]

After a first procedure carried out in 2002 by Pr Cribier's, Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement or TAVR revolutionized the management of aortic stenosis with a constant increase in the number of procedures performed worldwide. Experience of operators and teams and evolution of the technique has been accompanied by a drastic reduction in complications in patients at lower surgical risk. In parallel, the procedure was considerably simplified, carried out more and more under local anesthesia, with percutaneous femoral approach, secondary radial approach, prosthesis implantation without predilatation, rapid pacing on left ventricle wire and early discharge. Thus, the "simplified" TAVR adopted in most centers nowadays is a real revolution of the technique. However, simplified TAVR must be accompanied upstream by a rigorous selection of patients who can benefit from a minimalist procedure in order to guarantee its safety.

[TAVI in women, very encouraging results]

The population of elderly patients comprises a high percentage of women. This population is more vulnerable due to the presence of numerous comorbidities and is, therefore, particularly exposed to the risk of aortic valve degeneration, resulting in aortic valve stenosis whose symptoms are predictors of poor short-term outcomes. In the presence of symptomatic aortic stenosis, the recommended therapeutic option in this vulnerable population is the implementation of transcatheter aortic valve implantation, preferably via the femoral route. The outcomes of this procedure are better in women than in men despite a more frequent occurrence of vascular, bleeding and cerebral complications. Several hypotheses have been reported in the literature regarding the reasons for such differences. Among other reasons, it is likely that in female patients, the myocardium adjusts better to the occurrence of aortic stenosis and that recovery after valve treatment is also more optimal. Another explanation is the higher frequency of coronary artery disease in this older population. This has a considerable impact on the outcome even when coronary lesions are treated prior to valve implantation. There is still room for improvement and progress can be achieved by further reducing the size of the equipment used in order to decrease the diameter of the vascular access, and by continuing to simplify TAVI procedures. Less invasive techniques should result in decreased complication rates. In addition, dedicated studies should allow us to further improve our practice in this growing population of vulnerable patients.

Radial Artery Access for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions: Contemporary Insights and Novel Approaches

Since its introduction, the transradial access for percutaneous cardiovascular procedures has been associated with several advantages as compared to transfemoral approach, and has become the default for coronary angiography and intervention. In the last 30 years, a robust amount of evidence on the transradial approach has been mounted, promoting its diffusion worldwide. This article provides a comprehensive review of radial artery access for percutaneous cardiovascular interventions, including the evidence from clinical trials of transradial vs. transfemoral approach, technical considerations, access-site complications and limitations, alternative forearm accesses (e.g., ulnar and distal radial artery), and ultimately the use of the radial approach for structural interventions.

Guidewire pacing during transcatheter aortic valve implantation in a patient with complex congenital heart disease

We present a case of temporary guidewire pacing in a patient with Fontan anatomy during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Temporary pacing was successfully achieved utilizing this method without complications. There is an increasing population of patients with complex congenital heart disease and expanding variety of transcatheter interventions. Due to limitations in vascular access and surgical anatomies, guidewire pacing may have a wide array of potential applications in pediatrics and the congenital heart disease population.

[Evolution of transcatheter aortic valve implantation: from planning to robotic systems]

Since its introduction in 2002, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has evolved dramatically and is now standard of care for intermediate risk patients with aortic stenosis. The development of innovative transcatheter heart valves and refinement of technical skills have contributed to the decrease in complication rates associated with TAVI. Increased experience, smaller sheaths, rigorous pre-procedural planning and improved vascular closing techniques have resulted in markedly lower rates of vascular complications. The next step was the simplification of the procedure, which contributed to a further decrease in complications, reduced procedural time, and shorter hospital stay. Change-over from general anaesthesia to conscious sedation, refusal from predilatation, and use of the radial approach instead of the contralateral femoral approach are all instrumental in achieving optimal results. Prospects for development include visual assist systems and robotic systems that can potentially optimize the transcatheter aortic valve implantation process, improve safety and effectiveness of the procedure.

Alternative Access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Current Evidence and Future Directions

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the usual technique for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement. The transfemoral (TF) route is the most commonly used access type, and significant progress in this procedure has greatly increased the proportion of patients who can undergo it. Not all patients are suitable for TF TAVI, however, so other routes, including transapical, transaortic, subclavian, trans-subclavian/transaxillary, transcarotid and transcaval, may need to be used. Evidence on these routes shows promising results but the majority of this is registry data rather than randomised controlled trials, so TF TAVI remains the safest access route and should be considered for most patients. However, in patients who are unsuitable for TF TAVI, alternative access routes are safe and feasible. The challenges concern choosing the best route, the valve to use and skill of the specialist centre. This article provides a overview of options for alternative vascular access in TAVI, the clinical rationale for using them, current evidence and areas for clinical investigation.

Transcatheter tricuspid valve-in-valve replacement: Making it simpler

Transcatheter tricuspid valve-in-valve replacement (TTVR) represents an attractive therapeutic option in very high surgical risk patients with degenerated tricuspid bioprostheses. However, the procedural management of these patients might be challenging due to their comorbidities, long lasting heart valve disease and the presence of left-sided mechanical prostheses. Thus, a more "minimally disruptive" procedure would have several potential benefits in such a frail population. We present the cases of four patients admitted for congestive heart failure due to severe degeneration of their tricuspid bioprostheses who were treated with a minimalist TTVR. The protocol combined continuation of the oral anticoagulant treatment with no bridging therapy, the use of a single venous access with local anesthesia, rapid pacing via the stiff right ventricular wire, and transthoracic echocardiographic guidance and assessment, with no need for contrast injection. Our protocol aims at simplifying the TTVR procedure and might be a useful tool to avoid procedural complications and reduce hospital stay.

[Aortic stenosis in the elderly: The TAVI revolution]

TAVI is currently recommended for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in patients at prohibitive, high or intermediate surgical risk as estimated by surgical risk scores (STS score and EuroSCORE II). Comorbidity, technical feasibility of TAVI and concurrent pathology with need for complementary surgical correction are conditions to be considered to choose between open surgery and TAVI. The decision is often made by the "Heart Team". The transfemoral access must be favored. Conduction disturbance, stroke, bioprosthesis thrombosis and durability are the main setbacks of TAVI. Double antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel during 3 to 6 months is currently recommended after TAVI, followed by long-term aspirin single therapy.

Simplification and optimization of transcatheter aortic valve implantation - fast-track course without compromising safety and efficacy

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become an established therapeutic option for patients with symptomatic, severe aortic valve stenosis. Ageing of the Western and Asian population and expansion of indications for TAVI will lead to a substantial increase in the number of TAVI procedures performed worldwide within the next decades. In line with the maturation of TAVI over the past few years, there has also been a significant simplification and optimisation of the TAVI procedure. A minimalist TAVI procedure and fast-track TAVI course have been shown to have distinct advantages over the more traditional TAVI approach. The aim of this manuscript is to discuss strategies of TAVI simplification and optimization, with special focus on fast-track TAVI, without compromising safety and efficacy.

Position paper of French Interventional Group (GACI) for TAVI in France in 2018

Aortic stenosis is a frequent disease in the elderly. Its prevalence is 0.4% with a sharp increase after the age of 65, and its outcome is very poor when the patient becomes symptomatic. The interventional procedure known as TAVI (trans-catheter aortic valve implantation), which was developed in France and carried out for the first time in Rouen by Prof. Alain Cribier and his team in 2002, has proven to be a valid alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement. At first, this technique was shown to be efficient in patients with contra-indications to surgical treatment or deemed to be at high surgical risk. Given the very promising outcomes achieved as a result of close heart team collaboration, appropriate patient selection, simplified procedures and reduced complication rates, transfemoral (TF) TAVI is now preferred in symptomatic intermediate risk patients>75 years old according to the latest ESC guidelines. In 2017, in France, TAVI is currently performed in 50 centers with on-site cardiac surgery. The 2016 TAVI outcomes recorded in the French national TAVI registry (France TAVI) are very encouraging and show that for 7133 patients treated (age 83.4±7 years, logistic Euroscore 14%), 87% of whom via the TF approach, cross-over to surgery was very low (0.5%) with a 3.0% in-hospital mortality rate. The substantial increase in TAVI indications and the improvement of its outcomes may in the near future call for a reconsideration of the number of high volume centers authorized to carry out this technique.

TAVI: Simplification Is the Ultimate Sophistication

Since its introduction in 2002, TAVI has evolved dramatically and is now standard of care for intermediate risk patients when the femoral approach can be implemented safely. The development of innovative transcatheter heart valves (THVs) and refinement of technical skills have contributed to the decrease in complication rates associated with TAVI⁴. Increased experience, smaller sheaths, rigorous pre-procedural planning and improved vascular closing techniques have resulted in markedly lower rates of vascular complications. The next step is the simplification of the procedure, which should contribute to a further decrease in complications, and also reduce procedural time, hospital stay as well as staff workload and costs. Moving to conscious sedation, no predilatation, no temporary pace maker and use of the radial approach as the contralateral approach are all instrumental in achieving this ultimate refinement.

Guidewire Method for Measuring Local Left Ventricular Electrical Activation Time During Cardiac Resynchronization Implantation

The timing of local activation at left ventricular (LV) pacing leads is measured from the onset of the QRS complex to the peak of the LV electrogram (QLV). Pacing from the sites of late activation is associated with higher response rates to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Prior studies have measured QLV from permanent pacing leads, or have used electroanatomic mapping systems. The current study compares QLV measurements made with a guidewire to those collected from permanent LV pacing leads positioned at the same venous site without the use of electroanatomic mapping systems. In this study, 20 patients undergoing CRT implantation (14 males, mean QRS: 164.0 ms) had QLV measurements taken using a guidewire. QLV and LV electrogram duration measurements were made at LV pacing sites, and were repeated after positioning the permanent LV pacing lead at the same site. There was no difference in QLV measurements obtained using a guidewire and those obtained using the permanent pacing lead placed at the same site (p = 0.569). QLV measurements obtained with a guidewire and the permanent LV pacing lead at the same site, respectively, were strongly correlated (r = 0.965; p < 0.001). The median absolute difference in electrogram duration was 7.0 ms (p = 0.55). The average time required to make QLV measurements using the guidewire was 11.7 minutes [standard deviation (SD): 6.8]. The average total fluoroscopy time for the entire CRT implant procedure was 10.9 minutes (SD: 5.1). In light of these results, it can be suggested that a guidewire can be used to prospectively measure LV prior to selection or placement of a permanent pacing lead without the use of an electroanatomic mapping system.