Impact of closure devices on vascular complication and mortality rates in TAVI procedures

Percutaneous Versus Surgical Femoral Cannulation in Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) is increasing worldwide. In most cases, the surgical technique includes cannulation of the groin for the establishment of cardiopulmonary bypass, requiring a second surgical incision (SC) for exposure and cannulation of the femoral vessels. With the introduction of arterial closure devices, percutaneous cannulation (PC) of the groin has become a possible alternative. We performed a meta-analysis and systematic review to compare clinical endpoints between the patients who underwent PC and SC for MICS.

METHODS

Three databases were assessed. The primary outcome was any access site complication. Secondary outcomes were perioperative mortality, any wound complication, any vascular complication, lymphatic complications, femoral/iliac stenosis, stroke, procedural duration, and hospital length of stay (LOS). A random effects model was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies with 2,038 patients were included. When compared with PC, patients who underwent SC showed a higher incidence of any access site complication (odds ratio [OR] = 3.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.87 to 5.10, P < 0.01), any wound complication (OR = 10.10, 95% CI: 3.31 to 30.85, P < 0.01), lymphatic complication (OR = 9.37, 95% CI: 2.15 to 40.81, P < 0.01), and longer procedural duration (standardized mean difference = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.51, P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding perioperative mortality, any vascular complication, femoral/iliac stenosis, stroke, or hospital LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis suggests that surgical groin cannulation in MICS is associated with a higher incidence of any access site complication (especially wound complication and lymphatic fistula) and with a longer procedural time compared with PC. There was no difference in perioperative mortality.

Selection of Vascular Closure Devices in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Various vascular closure devices (VCDs) are commonly used for percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, superiority and safety profile among them remain unclear. We compared periprocedural complications among various VCDs in patients undergoing TAVR. PubMed and EMBASE were searched through January 2022 to identify clinical studies comparing any 2 VCDs of Prostar, Proglide and MANTA in patients who underwent TAVR. Studies using surgical cut-down or alternative access other than transfemoral approach were excluded. We analyzed the odds ratios (ORs) of vascular complications (VC), bleeding, acute kidney injury and all-cause mortality using a network meta-analysis. All outcomes were defined by Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 criteria. Two randomized controlled trials and 15 observational studies were identified, yielding a total of 11,344 patients including Prostar (n = 4499), Proglide (n = 5705), or MANTA group (n = 1140). The rates of major VC and life-threatening and major bleeding were significantly lower in Proglide compared to Prostar (OR [95 % CI] = 0.54 [0.32-0.89], 0.68 [0.52-0.90], and 0.49 [0.26-0.95], respectively). There was no significant difference in major VC and bleeding between Proglide and MANTA groups. Proglide was associated with a lower rate of acute kidney injury (0.56 [0.34-0.92]) and red blood cell transfusion (0.39 [0.16-0.98]) compared to Prostar. There was no significant difference in additional interventions and 30-day overall mortality among three groups. In this network meta-analysis of VCD in patients undergoing TAVR, MANTA and Proglide had comparable outcomes while Proglide appears superior to Prostar in terms of major VC and bleeding.

Large-bore arterial access closure after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Aims

As the indications to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) expand to patients at increasingly lower risk, procedure-related vascular and bleeding complications events must be minimized. We aimed to evaluate the impact of different large-bore arterial access closure devices on clinical outcomes after TAVR.

Methods and results

We searched for papers that reported outcomes according to the type of vascular closure device/technique used after TAVR and performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). Fifteen studies involving 9259 patients who underwent access site closure using PROSTAR™ XL percutaneous vascular surgical system (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA), Perclose ProGlide™ suture-mediated closure system (Abbott), or MANTA^TM vascular closure device (Teleflex, Morrisville, NC, USA) were included. NMA showed MANTA to have the highest likelihood of reducing a primary composite endpoint of intra-hospital death, major vascular complications, and major or life-threatening bleedings [surface under the cumulative ranking curve analysis (SUCRA) 94.8%], but this was mitigated when only randomized clinical trials and propensity-matched cohorts were included (SUCRA 56.1%). The ProGlide showed the highest likelihood to reduce major or life-threatening bleedings, especially with increasing procedural complexity, and the MANTA device to reduce major and minor vascular complications. The ProStar XL device performed poorly in all explored endpoints.

Conclusion

Available evidence summarized through a NMA shows that ProGlide and MANTA devices appear to be both valid vascular closure devices globally and to be the best options to minimize vascular complications and reduce bleeding in patients undergoing TAVR, respectively.

Pledget-assisted hemostasis to fix residual access-site bleedings after double pre-closure technique

BACKGROUND

The use of pre-closure suture-based devices represents a widely access-site hemostasis technique in percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter-aortic-valve-replacement (TF-TAVR); yet this technique is associated with the risk of a device failure that may result in clinically relevant residual bleeding. Thus, a bailout intervention is needed. So far, the best management of pre-closure device failure has not been recognized.

AIM

To report the first clinical results obtained using a novel bailout hemostasis technique for patients with double suture-based vascular closure device failure in the setting of TF-TAVR.

METHODS

We developed a “pledget-assisted hemostasis” technique to manage residual access-site bleeding. This consists of the insertion of a surgical, non-absorbable, polytetrafluoroethylene pledget over the sutures of the two ProGlide (Abbott Vascular, CA, United States). The ProGlide’s knot-pushers are used to push down the pledget and the hand-made slipknot to seal the femoral artery leak. This technique was used as a bailout strategy in patients undergoing TF-TAVR with a systematic double pre-closure technique. Post-procedural access-site angiography was systematically performed. In-hospital complications were systematically detected and classified according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria.

RESULTS

Out of 136 consecutive patients who underwent TF-TAVR, 15 patients (mean age 80.0 ± 7.2 years, 66.7% female) with access-site bleeding after double pre-closure technique failure were treated by pledget-assisted hemostasis. In the majority of patients, 16F sheath was used (n = 12; 80%). In 2 cases (13%), a peripheral balloon was also inflated in the iliac artery to limit blood loss during pledget preparation. Angiography-confirmed hemostasis (primary efficacy endpoint) was achieved in all patients. After the procedure, 1 patient required blood transfusion (2 units), and no other bleeding or major ischemic complication was noticed.

CONCLUSION

The “pledget assisted hemostasis” might be considered as a possible bailout technique to treat patients with residual access site bleeding. Further studies are needed to compare this approach with other bail-out techniques.

Novel self-expanding ALLEGRA transcatheter aortic valve for native aortic stenosis and degenerated bioprosthesis

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the safety and efficacy of the ALLEGRA valve in routine use.

BACKGROUND

The ALLEGRA aortic valve is a self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (THV) with bovine pericardial tissue and was CE approved in March 2017. Its unique design was developed to provide low prosthesis gradients.

METHODS

We analyzed patients receiving an ALLEGRA THV between May 2017 and March 2021 at our center for treatment of aortic valve stenosis or degenerated valve prosthesis. Hemodynamic results and clinical outcome according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus criteria were evaluated at discharge and three months post transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedure. 93 patients with a mean age of 82.5 ± 4.8 years and a median EuroScore II of 4.7 ± 3.4 were treated, 15 of them were valve-in-valve procedures.

RESULTS

Implantation was successful in 97.8% (91/93) and VARC-2 defined device success was achieved in 94.6% (88/93). In-hospital all-cause mortality was 2.2% (2/93). Life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complications and strokes were 3.2% (3/93), 2.2% (2/93) and 3.2% (3/93), respectively. Paravalvular leakage was none to trace in 60.4%, mild in 38.5% and moderate in 1.1%. Permanent pacemaker implantation in pacemaker naive patients was necessary in 9.5% (8/84). Mean gradient at discharge was 8.2 ± 4.3 mmHg for all patients; 7.1 ± 2.6 mmHg in patients treated for stenosis of the native aortic valve and 13.8 ± 6.3 mmHg in patients treated valve-in-valve.

CONCLUSIONS

The ALLEGRA THV provides excellent hemodynamic results and a good safety profile with a low complication rate.

Vascular Complications in TAVR: Incidence, Clinical Impact, and Management

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has replaced surgical aortic valve replacement as the new gold standard in elderly patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. However, alongside this novel approach, new complications emerged that require swift diagnosis and adequate management. Vascular access marks the first step in a TAVR procedure. There are several possible access sites available for TAVR, including the transfemoral approach as well as transaxillary/subclavian, transcarotid, transapical, and transcaval. Most cases are primarily performed through a transfemoral approach, while other access routes are mainly conducted in patients not suitable for transfemoral TAVR. As vascular access is achieved primarily by large bore sheaths, vascular complications are one of the major concerns during TAVR. With rising numbers of TAVR being performed, the focus on prevention and successful management of vascular complications will be of paramount importance to lower morbidity and mortality of the procedures. Herein, we aimed to review the most common vascular complications associated with TAVR and summarize their diagnosis, management, and prevention of vascular complications in TAVR.

Impact of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation on Thrombin Generation and Platelet Function

BACKGROUND

 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an evolving treatment of severe aortic valve stenosis. However, thromboembolic events such as stroke are common, predominantly early after TAVI. Optimal periprocedural antithrombotic regime is unknown. Especially, as antithrombotic medication enhances bleeding risk, thrombin generation and platelet function are crucial in the pathogenesis of ischemic events. However, the impact of the TAVI procedure on thrombin formation and platelet reactivity is not known by now.

METHODS

 We evaluated thrombin levels using thrombin-antithrombin (TAT) complexes and prothrombin fragments (PTFs) using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Furthermore, platelet reactivity was measured via light transmission aggregometry before and 2 hours after TAVI in 198 patients.

RESULTS

 TAT complexes and PTF F1 + 2 substantially increased during TAVI. Postprocedurally, TAT complexes and PTF were significantly higher after TAVI compared with percutaneous coronary intervention due to acute myocardial infarction, while preprocedural TAT complexes and PTF F1 + 2 did not differ. In contrast, platelet reactivity was not altered early after TAVI. Only adenosine diphosphate-induced aggregation was reduced, reflecting preprocedural loading with clopidogrel.

CONCLUSION

 In this pilot study, we were able to demonstrate that thrombin generation is significantly increased early after TAVI, while platelet function is not affected. Increased thrombin concentrations may contribute to the high risk of postprocedural thromboembolic events. This leads to the hypothesis that extended peri-interventional anticoagulation early after TAVI may be an approach to reduce thromboembolic events.

Rapid development of an iatrogenic aortic dissection following transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) represents a catheter-based and minimally invasive replacement of the aortic valve. TAVI is considered to be a relatively safe procedure and has evolved to a standard procedure in inoperable and high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. We present a case of an octogenarian who died in hospital less than a day after an initially satisfactory TAVI. Cardiologists suspected a combination of cardiogenic and hemorrhagic shock as the cause of death. Autopsy showed rupture of an extensive aortic dissection, which had developed within 24 h after the procedure. The cause of death was eventually defined as internal bleeding due to a rapid two-stage vascular process. The manner of death was considered accidental because an iatrogenic vessel injury beyond the aortic arch was causative for the death. This unusual case highlights the potential for rare, but fatal, complications within the scope of cardiac catheterizations, such as TAVI. Additionally, our findings suggest that these complications need to be recognized in the diagnostic process and management of post-interventional complications.

Vascular complications during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: The role of the vascular surgeon

Introduction

This study compares the incidence of vascular complications and other major outcomes between patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation, with and without a standardized preoperative vascular surgeon consultation.

Methods

This retrospective study evaluated all patients scheduled for transcatheter aortic valve implantation during a five-year period at a Hellenic University Hospital. Two main periods were evaluated: Group A (early period (2014–2015), without a standardized preoperative vascular surgeon consultation) and Group B (late period (2016–2018), with a standardized preoperative vascular surgeon consultation). All vascular complications as well as other major outcomes (early death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and treatment) were recorded. Univariate and multivariate analyses were also conducted.

Results

Overall, 382 transcatheter aortic valve implantation procedures were conducted (Group A: n = 115; duration = 19 months; Group B: n = 267; duration = 41 months). Overall, 58 vascular complications were recorded (21 patients in Group A and 37 patients in Group B (18.3% versus 13.9%; P = 0.279)). However, vascular complications that necessitated a vascular surgeon’s interference were more frequent during the first period (13% versus 4.9%; P = 0.009). Among patients with a vascular complication, early mortality was higher during the first period (14.3% versus 0%; P = 0.034) although stroke and myocardial infarction rates were similar. Age >80 years (OR = 1.856 [1.134–3.452]; P = 0.03) and preoperative vascular surgeon consultation (OR = 0.345 [0.132–0.756]; P = 0.015) were the only independent predictors for vascular complications.

Conclusions

A standardized preoperative evaluation by a vascular surgeon may decrease the risk for vascular complications that necessitate a repair as well as early mortality among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation procedures.

Early Outcomes After Percutaneous Closure of Access Site in Transfemoral Transcatheter Valve Implantation Using the Novel Vascular Closure Device Collagen Plug-Based MANTA

A new collagen-based MANTA vascular closure device (VCD) was developed for closing large-bore arteriotomies after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We evaluated safety and feasibility at 30-day follow-up in terms of vascular and bleeding complications and mortality of the collagen-based MANTA VCD compared with the suture-based Prostar XL VCD in a cohort of 366 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI between January 2015 and April 2018. The MANTA VCD was used in 168 patients and the Prostar XL VCD in 198 patients, with successful closure of 98.8% and 98.5%, respectively. VARC-2 defined as major vascular and bleeding complications was similar in both groups (MANTA vs Prostar XL): 0.6% versus 1.0% (p = 0.661) and 0.6% versus 1.5% (p = 0.102). Minor vascular and bleeding complications, were significantly more frequent (10.7 vs 18.8 %, p = 0.003 and 13.7 vs 19.7%, p = 0.080, respectively) in the Prostar XL cohort. Thirty-day all-cause mortality was 2.7%, without significant difference between the groups (p = 0.278). The MANTA device is a safe and feasible option for vascular access closure in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI.

Impact of percutaneous closure device type on vascular and bleeding complications after TAVR: A post hoc analysis from the BRAVO-3 randomized trial

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Prostar XL (PS) and ProGlide (PG) are common vascular closure devices (VCD) used in TAVR via transfemoral vascular approach. The impact of these VCD on vascular and bleeding complications remains unclear.

METHODS

The BRAVO-3 trial randomized 802 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR. We stratified patients according to type of VCD used and examined the 30-day incidence of major or minor vascular complications, major bleeding (BARC ≥3b), AKI and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; death, myocardial infarction or stroke).

RESULTS

A total of 746 (93%) patients were treated with either PS (n = 352, 47%) or PG (n = 394, 53%) VCD, without significant differences in successful deployment rate (PS 322 [91.2%] vs. PG 373 [94.2%] respectively, p = .20). PG was associated with a significantly lower incidence of major or minor vascular complications, compared to PS (adjusted OR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.37-0.80; p < .01). Rates of acute kidney injury were also lower with the PG device. There was no significant difference between bleeding, MACCE, and death.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to PS, the PG VCD was associated with a lower rate of major or minor vascular complications and lower rates of AKI after transfemoral TAVR.

Cut-down outperforms complete percutaneous transcatheter valve implantation

Background

The ideal approach for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation is still widely debated. The objective of this study was to compare access and bleeding complications of complete percutaneous versus the surgical cut-down approach for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Methods

The study included 667 consecutive patients from November 2008 to December 2016, 466 in the percutaneous group and 201 in the cut-down group. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the 2 groups. Primary study endpoints were vascular access site and bleeding complications according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium II criteria.

Results

Mean procedure time was shorter in the cut-down group: 93.5 ± 22.0 (percutaneous) vs. 69 ± 19 min (cut-down), p < 0.001. The rate of access complications was higher in the percutaneous group: 20.4% (95/466) vs. 8.5% (17/201), p = 0.037; with predominantly minor complications in the percutaneous cohort: 14.4% (67/466) vs. 2.5% (5/201), p = 0.04. Bleeding complications were more frequent in the percutaneous group: 21.9% (102/466) vs. 4.5% (9/201), p = 0.01. Hospital mortality was 5.2% in the percutaneous group and 1.9% in the cut-down group ( p = 0.075).

Conclusions

Surgical cut-down provided controlled access and resulted in fewer access site and bleeding complications. Nonetheless, major access complications were not significantly different between the two cohorts. The two approaches must be seen as complementary techniques. A portfolio containing both techniques is the only way to provide a tailor-made and patient-orientated approach ensuring the safest access based on the individual vessel condition.