Alternative access options for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with no conventional access and chest pathology

Evolution of Alternative-access Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Transfemoral access is the most common approach for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, a subset of patients require alternative access. This study describes the evolution and outcomes of alternative-access TAVR at Cleveland Clinic.

METHODS

From January 2006 to January 2019, 2446 patients underwent TAVR, 414 (17%) through alternative access (247 transapical, 95 transaortic, 56 transaxillary, 2 transcarotid, 10 transiliac, 4 transcaval). Patients undergoing alternative-access TAVR had high preoperative risk. Propensity-matched comparisons were targeted at comparing transfemoral versus transaxillary approaches since 2012.

RESULTS

Over time, the favored alternative-access approach shifted from transapical and transaortic to transaxillary. Pacemaker requirement was similar for alternative-access and transfemoral approaches. Compared with transfemoral access, major vascular injuries were higher in the alternative-access group (12 [2.9%] vs 27 [1.3%], P = .02), but minor vascular injuries were lower (13 [3.1%] vs 198 [9.8%], P < .0001). Non-risk-adjusted 5-year survival was lower in the alternative-access group (45% vs 59%). Compared with intrathoracic approaches (transapical and transaortic), transaxillary access was associated with fewer blood transfusions (12 [21%] vs 176 [51%], P < .0001), less prolonged ventilation (1 [1.8%] vs 38 [11%], P = .03), and shorter length of stay (median, 5 vs 7.5 days, P < .0001). Survival and major morbidity were similar in matched comparisons of the transfemoral and transaxillary approaches. No brachial plexus injuries occurred with transaxillary access.

CONCLUSIONS

The transaxillary approach has emerged as our preferred alternative-access strategy for TAVR. It is associated with superior operative outcomes compared with transthoracic approaches, and results are comparable with those of the transfemoral approach.

Right Transaxillary Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using the "Flip-n-Flex" Technique

BACKGROUND

Right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAx-TAVR) is rarely performed due to challenging vascular tortuosity and unfavorable implantation angles. We explored this procedure using the newer-generation balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) valve and our novel "flip-n-flex" technique. The safety and effectiveness of the procedure and the learning curve of our early experiences were investigated.

METHODS

The first 10 consecutive patients undergoing right TAx-TAVR performed at our center from June 2016 to May 2018 were included in the study. Patients' preoperative characteristics, procedural outcomes, and clinical outcomes were studied. Intraoperative fluoroscopy times were also reviewed to analyze the procedural learning curve.

RESULTS

The 10 patients were a mean age of 81.8 ± 8.7 years, and 5 patients (50%) were women. Mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 12.0% ± 9.5%. Procedural success was achieved in all cases without vascular complications. Paravalvular leak was absent or mild in all patients. Two patients (20%) required permanent pacemaker implantation. The median postoperative length of stay was 4 days (range, 2-13 days). The 30-day mortality was 0%. Mean transvalvular gradient improved from 38.4 ± 12.6 mm Hg to 9 ± 4.4 mm Hg postoperatively. New York Heart Association Functional Classification improved in all patients. The fluoroscopy time showed marked reduction from 44.1 ± 8.2 minutes to 17.4 ± 2.9 minutes with the use of the flip-n-flex technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Our early experience of right TAx-TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve demonstrated satisfactory outcomes and a quick learning as facilitated by the flip-n-flex technique. This could be a beneficial TAVR approach to suitable patients.

Axillary Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Peripheral Vascular Disease

The axillary artery seems an interesting alternative in nonfemoral transaortic valve replacement (TAVR) patients. This study describes our experience with this technique and its short-term follow-up results. This is a retrospective single center study. All axillary TAVR performed in our department between 2015 and 2017 were included in the study. Mean follow-up was 13.2 ± 9.5 months. All reporting was done according to the VARC-2 criteria. During the period covered, 43 patients had an axillary TAVR. Most patients were men (62.7%), had a mean age of 83.9 ± 5.3 years and presented with EuroSCORE I, II, and STS score of 27.9 ± 13.5%, 5.6 ± 4.9%, and 7.7 ± 4.05%, respectively. Vascular access was successful in all patients with a higher frequency of left approach (69.7%, n = 30). Both Medtronic CoreValve 37.2% (n = 16) and Edwards Sapien3 62.8% (n = 27) valves were used. An apical Certitude delivery system was preferentially used (24/27) in the latter group. There were no reported instances of valve migration or need for a second valve implantation. A single case (2.3%) of arterial vascular complication was reported. Central neurologic morbidity was 2.3%. No patient experienced brachial plexus injury. A pacemaker was implanted in 18.6% of cases (n = 8), with no significant difference between the 2 valves patient groups (S3 14.8% vs CV 25%, P 0.67). The 30-day mortality was 6.9% (n = 3) and 1-year survival was 86% [95% CI 72.6, 93.4]. Axillary TAVR is associated with acceptable morbidity, mortality, and leads to satisfactory short-term clinical outcomes. It has the potential to become the main alternative access route in nonfemoral TAVR patients.

Surgeon Involvement in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the United States: A 2016 Society of Thoracic Surgeons Survey

BACKGROUND

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) surveyed cardiothoracic surgeon participants in its Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (ACSD) to learn the extent of surgeon involvement in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures.

METHODS

An electronic survey was delivered to 2,594 surgeons in June 2016. When the survey closed 2 weeks later, 487 completed surveys had been submitted for a response rate of 18.8%.

RESULTS

Among the 487 participants in the ACSD who responded to the survey, 410 (84.2%) reported that TAVR was performed at their institutions. Approximately three-quarters reported that they performed TAVR procedures as part of a heart team (77.5%; 313 of 404), cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons were jointly responsible for TAVR referrals (83.7%; 339 of 405), and TAVR programs were administered either jointly by the cardiology and cardiac surgery departments or exclusively by the cardiac surgery department (73.3%; 297 of 405). A majority were involved in the pre-, intra-, and postoperative care of patients undergoing TAVR, with 91.4% (370 of 405) reporting participation in multidisciplinary meetings, at least 50% regularly performing technical aspects in 10 of 11 conduct of operation categories, and 86.6% (266 of 307) caring for patients undergoing TAVR after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac surgeons in the United States are active participants in the management of patients with aortic stenosis as part of the heart team. The STS survey found that not only were they actively involved in the treatment decision-making process but they also played a significant role in the valve procedure, including deployment and postprocedural care. The heart team model continues to evolve and should be expanded into other areas of structural heart disease.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: new hope in the management of valvular heart disease

Severe calcific aortic stenosis is relatively common, and unless treated with valve replacement it carries an adverse prognosis. A large number of patients, however, are denied surgery due to their advanced age or coexistent medical conditions that increase perioperative cardiovascular risks. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), a technique in which a bioprosthetic valve is inserted via a catheter and implanted within the diseased native aortic valve, is a new therapeutic modality for treatment of older patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and other comorbidities, who have an inherently high surgical risk. This review will provide an overview of the pivotal trials in the development of TAVI; while also investigating important complications and limitations of the procedure and evaluating how new valves are being designed and clinically evaluated, with the ultimate goal of reducing potential complications and expanding the use of TAVI to lower-risk patient cohorts.

Learning curves for transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the PARTNER-I trial: Technical performance, success, and safety

OBJECTIVES

Introduction of hybrid techniques, such as transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TA-TAVR), requires skills that a heart team must master to achieve technical efficiency: the technical performance learning curve. To date, the learning curve for TA-TAVR remains unknown. We therefore evaluated the rate at which technical performance improved, assessed change in occurrence of adverse events in relation to technical performance, and determined whether adverse events after TA-TAVR were linked to acquiring technical performance efficiency (the learning curve).

METHODS

From April 2007 to February 2012, 1100 patients, average age 85.0 ± 6.4 years, underwent TA-TAVR in the PARTNER-I trial. Learning curves were defined by institution-specific patient sequence number using nonlinear mixed modeling.

RESULTS

Mean procedure time decreased from 131 to 116 minutes within 30 cases (P = .06) and device success increased to 90% by case 45 (P = .0007). Within 30 days, 354 patients experienced a major adverse event (stroke in 29, death in 96), with possibly decreased complications over time (P ∼ .08). Although longer procedure time was associated with more adverse events (P < .0001), these events were associated with change in patient risk profile, not the technical performance learning curve (P = .8).

CONCLUSIONS

The learning curve for TA-TAVR was 30 to 45 procedures performed, and technical efficiency was achieved without compromising patient safety. Although fewer patients are now undergoing TAVR via nontransfemoral access, understanding TA-TAVR learning curves and their relationship with outcomes is important as the field moves toward next-generation devices, such as those to replace the mitral valve, delivered via the left ventricular apex.

Abdominal aorta as an alternative access route for transcatheter aortic valve replacement

A variety of access routes have been employed for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We report a TAVR case using the abdominal aorta as the direct access route when other approaches are not feasible.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: current status and future directions

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a revolutionary therapy for patients with aortic stenosis. Large registries and randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that TAVR is safe and effective in patients considered inoperable because of severe comorbidities and those who are high-risk surgical candidates. As TAVR evolves for lower-risk patients, attention will need to focus on reducing the rates of vascular injury, stroke, and paravalvular regurgitation. In this review, we discuss the status of TAVR in clinical practice, including patient selection, preoperative evaluation, techniques, and complications.