Alternative Access Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Nonagenarians versus Younger Patients

Transcarotid versus trans-axillary/subclavian transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR): A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) is the treatment of choice in patients with severe aortic stenosis. Transcarotid (TCa) or Trans-axillary/subclavian (TAx/Sc) are safer and less invasive non-femoral approaches, where transfemoral access is difficult or impossible to obtain.

METHODS

This meta-analysis was performed based on PRISMA guidelines after registering in PROSPERO (CRD42023482842). This meta-analysis was performed to compare the safety of the transcarotid and trans-axillary/subclavian approach for TAVR including studies from inception to October 2023.

RESULTS

Seven studies with a total of 6227 patients were included in the analysis (TCa: 2566; TAx/Sc: 3661). Transcarotid TAVR approach had a favorable trend for composite of stroke and all-cause mortality (OR 0.79, CI 0.60-1.04), all-cause mortality, stroke, major vascular complication, and new requirement of permanent pacemaker though those were statistically insignificant. On sub-analysis of the results of the studies based on the territory (USA vs French), composite outcome of all cause mortality, stroke and major bleeding (OR 0.54, CI 0.54-0.81), composite of stroke and all cause mortality (OR 0.64, CI 0.50-0.81), and stroke/TIA (OR 0.53, CI 0.39-0.73) showed lower odds of occurrence among patient managed with TCa approach in the American cohort.

CONCLUSION

Overall, transcarotid approach had favorable though statistically insignificant odds for composite (stroke and all-cause mortality) and individual outcomes (stroke, all-cause mortality, etc.). There are significant variations in observed outcomes based on study's geographic location. Large prospective randomized clinical trials comparing the two approaches with representative samples are necessary to guide the clinicians in choosing among these approaches.

Transaxillary Versus Transaortic Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in the Treatment of Aortic Stenosis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a technique that can be performed through multiple approaches, and the benefits of one approach over another are still being evaluated to make sure patients receive the best possible care. Our meta-analysis aims to compare clinical and procedural outcomes of the transaxillary (TAx) and transaortic (TAo) approaches to validate the more optimal procedure.

The systematic literature search was done via PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central databases from inception to December 2021, to identify articles reporting data on both TAx TAVR and TAo TAVR. In addition, we checked ClinicalTrials.gov for more published or unpublished trials. Baseline patient characteristics, procedure results, and clinical results were extracted from the article and pooled for analysis. A quantitative meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.3 (Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). The outcomes extracted included blood transfusion, conversion to sternotomy, tamponade, contrast amount, procedure time, bleeding incidents (minor, major, or life-threatening), length of stay (LOS), vascular complications (minor or major), acute kidney injury (AKI), paravalvular leak (PVL), permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, 30-day mortality, one-year mortality, 30-day stroke, and device success.

The final analysis included 11 articles, consisting of 10 observational studies and a pivotal trial. Cumulative results revealed that the TAo approach had a significantly lower incidence of vascular complications (RR = 2.30; 95% CI = 1.22 to 4.35), and the need for implantation of a permanent pacemaker (RR = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.30 to 2.54) along with a lower amount of contrast (mean difference (MD) = 27.40; 95% CI = 3.73 to 51.08) needed to be used. The TAx group was associated with a significantly lower 30-day mortality (RR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.69), AKI (RR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.67), and length of hospital stay (MD = −1.95; 95% CI = −2.51 to −1.38). No significant difference was observed between the outcomes of 30-day stroke (RR = 1.38; 95% CI = 0.81 to 2.33), PVL (RR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.50 to 2.18), tamponade (RR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.12 to 4.03), conversion to sternotomy (RR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.06 to 4.30), device success (RR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.07), the incidence of bleeding (RR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.51 to 1.10), and procedure time (MD = 4.44; 95% CI = −96.30 to 105.17).

Both the procedures were associated with their benefits and risks. Although most of the outcomes favored TAx transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), it is too early to say if it would be better than TAo TAVI. To authenticate the findings concluded in this meta-analysis and further improve our understanding of the efficacy, safety, and risk profile between TAx and TAo approaches for TAVI, large sample randomized clinical trials are required on a wide scale.

Clinical outcomes in nonagenarians undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To compare the risk of procedural complications and mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in nonagenarians (age ≥ 90 years) compared to younger patients (< 90 years). Although TAVI could be considered as a treatment option in nonagenarians, several previous studies have shown conflicting outcomes between nonagenarians and younger patients who underwent TAVI. We conducted a comprehensive literature search through PubMed and EMBASE to investigate the clinical outcomes of nonagenarians after TAVI. The outcomes of interest were short- and long-term mortality and procedural complications. Our study identified 16 observational studies including a total of 179,565 patients (21,674 nonagenarian patients and 157,891 younger patients. Nonagenarians had a significantly higher rate of short- (hazard ratio [HR], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.48, 1.38-1.59; P < 0.001) and long-term mortality (HR, 95% CI: 1.34, 1.24-1.44; P < 0.001) than younger patients after TAVI. Furthermore, there were significant differences in major and/or life-threatening bleeding (risk ratio [RR], 95% CI: 1.21, 1.05-1.39; P = 0.008), stroke (HR, 95% CI: 1.24, 1.11-1.40; P < 0.001), and major vascular complication (RR, 95% CI: 2.15, 1.35-3.42; P = 0.001) between nonagenarians and younger patients after TAVI. Minor vascular complication, myocardial infarction and permanent pacemaker implantation rate were similar between the two groups. Nonagenarians had significantly higher rate of short- and long-term mortality, major and/or life-threatening bleeding, stroke, and major vascular complication after TAVI. Although TAVI is a treatment option in nonagenarians, careful and appropriate selection of patients is essential to improve clinical outcomes.