Non-transfemoral access sites for transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement utilizing monitored anesthesia care: a case report

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the standard of care for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis. The most common approach to TAVR is transfemoral utilizing monitored anesthesia care or general anesthesia. On occasion, transfemoral access is not possible and alternative access to TAVR is required. Herein, we describe the case of a patient undergoing a transcarotid approach to TAVR with regional anesthesia and monitored anesthesia care utilizing a multidisciplinary heart team.

In-Hospital Outcomes in the Brazilian Registry of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation - 14-Year Analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has had an exponential increase of its indication, being incorporated into the Brazilian Unified Public Health System in 2022, thus requiring assessment of its use in Brazil.

OBJETICVE

To assess the factors associated with in-hospital mortality and non-fatal complications in both genders in the Brazilian Registry of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and New Technologies (RIBAC-NT) population.

METHOD

Analysis of the RIBAC-NT database from 2008 to 2022 was performed. Logistic models and machine learning were used for statistical assessment of the association between variables and outcomes. The software R was used and a 5% significance level, adopted.

RESULTS

Analysis of 2588 patients (women, 51.2%; in-hospital death, 8.2%). Mortality was associated with procedural complications, of which major vascular complication (VC) and acute kidney injury (AKI) stood out (p<0.001). Major VC occurred in 6% of the patients, with 34% mortality; AKI occurred in 8.8%, with 13% mortality, which increased up to 8 times when AKI coexisted with other complications. Non-fatal complications occurred in 50.5% of all patients, affecting 63% of those with 1st generation (1G) bioprosthesis and 39% of those with 2nd generation (2G) bioprosthesis (p<0,001). Non-femoral access and heart rhythm influenced non-fatal complications in patients with 1G prostheses, while complications in patients with 2G prosthesis associated with the female gender (39.6% vs. 30.4%, p=0.003).

CONCLUSION

In-hospital mortality in the RIBAC-NT population was directly associated with procedural complications, mainly major VC and AKI. The occurrence of non-fatal complications differed according to gender and bioprosthesis type.

Ten-Year Experience with a Transapical Approach for Transcatheter Aortic and Mitral Valve Implantation

BACKGROUND

The transfemoral approach represents the optimal access for TAVI due to its low invasiveness; however, up to 10-15% of TAVI candidates are considered unsuitable for femoral access because of significant peripheral vascular disease and need alternative access.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective observational study including all consecutive adult patients undergoing transcatheter procedures through a TA approach from March 2015 to April 2024.

RESULTS

213 patients underwent transcatheter aortic or mitral valve implantation through a TA approach and were enrolled in this study. The mean age of the patients was 79.5 ± 5.7 years, and 54% of the patients were males. The mean Euroscore II was 7.9 ± 6.4%. One-third of the patients had previous cardiac surgery. The overall mean survival time was 5.3 ± 0.3 years. Nine (4%) patients developed infective endocarditis (IE) during the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The transapical approach for transcatheter procedures is a safe and effective procedure for patients unsuitable for TF access with low periprocedural mortality and a low rate of post-procedural complications when performed by experienced surgeons and cardiologists.

Transcarotid versus transthoracic transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transthoracic approaches may be contraindicated in some patients and may be associated with poorer outcomes. Therefore other alternative access routes are increasingly being performed. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on Transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TC-TAVR) and meta-analysis comparing outcomes of TC-TAVR and other access routes.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched for controlled randomized and non-randomized studies from 4 online databases. We presented data using risk ratios (95 % confidence intervals) and measured heterogeneity using Higgins' I2.

RESULTS

Sixteen observational studies on Transcarotid TAVR were included in the analysis; 4 studies compared 180 TC-TAVR patients vs 524 TT-TAVR patients. The mean age and STS score for patients undergoing TC-TAVR were 80 years and 7.6 respectively. For TT-TAVR patients, the mean age and STS score were 79.7 years and 8.7 respectively. TC-TAVR patients had lower 30-day MACE [7.8 % vs 13.7 %; OR 0.54 (95 % CI 0.29-0.99, P = 0.05)] and major or life-threatening bleeding [4.0 % vs 14.2 %; OR 0.25 (95 % CI 0.09-0.67, P = 0.006)]. There was no significant difference in 30-day: mortality [5.0 % vs 8.6 %; OR 0.61 (95 % CI 0.29-1.30, P = 0.20)], stroke or transient ischemic attack [2.8 % vs 4.0 %; OR 0.65 (95 % CI 0.25-1.73, P = 0.39)] and moderate or severe aortic valve regurgitation [5.0 % vs 4.6 %; OR 1.14. (95 % CI 0.52-2.52, P = 0.75)]. There was a trend towards fewer major vascular complications in TC-TAVR [3.0 % vs 7.8 %; OR 0.42 (95 % CI 0.16-1.12, P = 0.08)].

CONCLUSION

Compared with transthoracic TAVR, TC-TAVR patients had lower odds of 30-day MACE and life-threatening bleeding and no differences in 30-day mortality, stroke or TIA, aortic valve regurgitation.

Low Left-Ventricular Ejection Fraction as a Predictor of Intraprocedural Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become an established alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) for patients with moderate-to-high perioperative risk. Periprocedural TAVR complications decrease with growing expertise of implanters. Nevertheless, TAVR can still be accompanied by life-threatening adverse events such as intraprocedural cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This study analyzed the role of a reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in intraprocedural complications during TAVR. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes from patients undergoing TAVR in a high-volume center (600 cases per year) were analyzed retrospectively with regard to their left-ventricular ejection fraction. Patients with a reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction (EF ≤ 40%) faced a significantly higher risk of perioperative adverse events. Within this cohort, patients were significantly more often in need of mechanical ventilation (35% vs. 19%). These patients also underwent CPR (17% vs. 5.8%), defibrillation due to ventricular fibrillation (13% vs. 5.4%), and heart-lung circulatory support (6.1% vs. 2.5%) more often. However, these intraprocedural adverse events showed no significant impact on postoperative outcomes regarding in-hospital mortality, stroke, or in-hospital stay. A reduced preprocedural LVEF is a risk factor for intraprocedural adverse events. With respect to this finding, the identified patient cohort should be treated with more caution to prevent intraprocedural incidents.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Access Sites: Same Goals, Distinct Aspects, Various Merits and Demerits

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been established as a safe and efficacious treatment for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). Despite being initially developed and indicated for high-surgical-risk patients, it is now offered to low-risk populations based on the results of large randomized controlled trials. The most common access sites in the vast majority of patients undergoing TAVI are the common femoral arteries; however, 10-20% of the patients treated with TAVI require an alternative access route, mainly due to peripheral atherosclerotic disease or complex anatomy. Hence, to achieve successful delivery and implantation of the valve, several arterial approaches have been studied, including transcarotid (TCr), axillary/subclavian (A/Sc), transapical (TAp), transaortic (TAo), suprasternal-brachiocephalic (S-B), and transcaval (TCv). This review aims to concisely summarize the most recent literature data and current guidelines as well as evaluate the various access routes for TAVI, focusing on the indications, the various special patient groups, and the advantages and disadvantages of each technique, as well as their adverse events.

ESC/EACTS vs. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of severe aortic stenosis

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a serious and complex condition, for which optimal management continues to evolve rapidly. An understanding of current clinical practice guidelines is critical to effective patient care and shared decision-making. This state of the art review of the 2021 European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery Guidelines and 2020 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines compares their recommendations for AS based on the evidence to date. The European and American guidelines were generally congruent with the exception of three key distinctions. First, the European guidelines recommend intervening at a left ventricular ejection fraction of 55%, compared with 60% over serial imaging by the American guidelines for asymptomatic patients. Second, the European guidelines recommend a threshold of ≥65 years for surgical bioprosthesis, whereas the American guidelines employ multiple age categories, providing latitude for patient factors and preferences. Third, the guidelines endorse different age cut-offs for transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement, despite limited evidence. This review also discusses trends indicating a decreasing proportion of mechanical valve replacements. Finally, the review identifies gaps in the literature for areas including transcatheter aortic valve implantation in asymptomatic patients, the appropriateness of Ross procedures, concomitant coronary revascularization with aortic valve replacement, and bicuspid AS. To summarize, this state of the art review compares the latest European and American guidelines on the management of AS to highlight three areas of divergence: timing of intervention, valve selection, and surgical vs. transcatheter aortic valve replacement criteria.

Comparison of the Recent Updates to the ACC/AHA and ESC Guidelines for the Management of Valvular Heart Disease: Similarities and Differences

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There have been several advances in the diagnosis and management of valvular heart disease (VHD) over the last decade. These have been reflected in the latest European and North American guidelines, although both contain significant similarities and differences. In this review, we highlight the important overlaps and variations between the updated guidelines and their previous versions to help guide the general cardiologist.

RECENT FINDINGS

There has been extensive revision on the use of percutaneous treatments, the indications for intervention in asymptomatic VHD, and perioperative bridging therapies. The updated guidelines provide new recommendations in many aspects of VHD; however, there remain significant gaps in the role of biomarkers in VHD and the long-term outcomes of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and transcatheter therapies.

Contemporary utilization of the axillary artery in cardiac surgery

INTRODUCTION

The axillary artery is a reliable inflow vessel when addressing pathology of the aortic root and aortic arch that may preclude standard central cannulation strategies. This narrative review examines the use of the axillary artery in cardiac surgery. Anatomy, indications for use, cannulation strategies, and potential complications will be discussed.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the current literature was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Review, and authoritative committee guidelines. A narrative review incorporating current available evidence was undertaken.

COMMENT

Use of the axillary artery in select cardiac surgical cases is reliable, reproducible, and may be preferable in certain cases involving ascending aortic pathology, reoperative surgery, porcelain aorta, access for transcatheter valve therapies, and peripheral mechanical circulatory support.

Transaortic Placement of Percutaneous Mechanical Support Device via Partial Sternotomy: Feasible Option for Unsuitable Axillary Artery Access

Acute decompensated refractory cardiogenic shock is an emergency in which the prompt instauration of mechanical circulatory support improves outcomes. The typical, initial approach for device delivery is via femoral vessels due to easy access and safety. If longer support is needed, the femoral access will severely impair the patient’s mobility and can also limit the amount of support given as the new-generation devices are too large for direct arterial insertion. Upper-body arterial conduits (UBACs) are used for the delivery of larger, percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVADs). The Impella 5.5 (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) is a pVAD that can be deployed through a UBAC by either axillary/subclavian access or a transaortic approach. The latter approach is typically used in cases of postcardiotomy shock, in which the ascending aorta is already exposed through a full sternotomy. However, in some cases, the axillary artery is not suitable due to size (<6 mm in diameter), and a smaller pVAD is delivered into the heart. To avoid providing suboptimal support, we present an alternative, minimally invasive approach in which the larger device is delivered through the ascending aorta. This article summarizes the details of this approach through a mini upper partial sternotomy and reviews the relevant technical considerations.

Safety of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Aortic Aneurysm: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

Introduction

There is a paucity of data regarding the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) among patients with thoracic or abdominal aortic aneurysms (AA). Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, we explored the safety of TAVR among patients with a diagnosis of AA.

Methods

We queried the National Inpatient Sample database (2012–2017) for hospitalized patients undergoing TAVR, using ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes for endovascular TAVR. Reports show that > 95% of endovascular TAVR in the US is via transfemoral access, so our population are mostly patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR. Using propensity score matching, we compared the trends and outcomes of TAVR procedures among patients with versus without AA.

Results

From a total sample of 29,517 individuals who had TAVR procedures between January 2012 and December 2017, 910 had a diagnosis of AA. In 774 matched-pair analysis, all-cause in-hospital mortality was similar in patients with and without AA OR 0.63 [(95% CI 0.28–1.43), p = 0.20]. The median length of stay was higher in patients with AA: 4 days (IQR 2.0–7.0) versus 3 days (IQR 2.0–6.0) p = 0.01. Risk of AKI [OR 1.01 (0.73–1.39), p = 0.87], heart block requiring pacemaker placement [OR 1.17 (0.81–1.69), p = 0.40], aortic dissection [OR 2.38 (0.41–13.75), p = 0.25], acute limb ischemia [OR 0.46 (0.18–1.16), p = 0.09], vascular complications [OR 0.80 (0.34–1.89), p = 0.53], post-op bleeding [OR 1.12 (0.81–1.57), p = 0.42], blood transfusion [OR 1.20 (0.84–1.70), p = 0.26], and stroke [OR 0.58 (0.24–1.39), p = 0.25] were similar in those with and without AA.

Conclusions

Data from a large nationwide database demonstrated that patients with AA undergoing TAVR are associated with similar in-hospital outcomes compared with patients without AA.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40119-022-00258-6.

Transfemoral Versus Subclavian Access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to compare outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) performed through subclavian access with those performed through transfemoral access.

METHODS

This was an observational study utilizing an institutional TAVR database from 2010 to 2018. All patients undergoing a TAVR via a transfemoral (TF-TAVR) or subclavian (SC-TAVR) approach were included in the study. The groups were analyzed for differences in operative mortality and postoperative outcomes. Multivariable Cox analysis was performed to identify variables associated with long-term survival after TAVR.

RESULTS

Of the 1,095 patients identified, 133 patients underwent SC-TAVR and 962 patients underwent TF-TAVR. Patients who underwent SC-TAVR were younger, more likely to have chronic lung disease and peripheral vascular disease, had higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality scores, and were more likely to have self-expanding valves placed (P < 0.05). Operative mortality was similar between the TF-TAVR (2.7%) and SC-TAVR (3.8%) groups. There were no significant differences in stroke, length of stay, 30-day readmission, blood transfusions, acute kidney injury, need for permanent pacemaker, paravalvular leak, or major vascular complications between the groups (P > 0.05). The unadjusted Kaplan-Meier survival estimate for TF-TAVR was significantly higher than for SC-TAVR (P = 0.009, log-rank). However, on multivariable Cox analysis, subclavian access was not significantly associated with an increased hazard of death as compared with transfemoral access (P = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes of SC-TAVR are comparable to those of TF-TAVR. Subclavian access may be a favorable alternative approach when TF-TAVR is contraindicated.

Vascular complications after transcatheter transfemoral aortic valve implantation: Modified sheath-to-femoral artery ratio as a new predictor

OBJECTIVE

Vascular complications (VCs) contribute to increased morbidity and mortality in patients who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI); however, studies on their incidence and predictors show conflicting results. In this study, we sought to assess the incidence, impact, and predictors of VCs in transfemoral (TF) TAVI and also investigated the predictive role of manufacturer's size charts and a new predictor modified sheath-to-femoral artery ratio.

METHODS

A total of 223 patients undergoing TF-TAVI were categorized into 2 groups. The patients were divided as eligible and ineligible according to the manufacturer's guidelines (MG), and the same patient cohort was dichotomized into eligible and ineligible on the basis of sheath-to-femoral artery ratio (SFAR) value of less than or greater than or equal to modified SFAR (md-SFAR). VCs (defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium II criteria) were retrospectively compared.

RESULTS

According to the manufacturer's size charts, 65 patients were unsuitable; however, 35 patients were ineligible for TF-TAVI per the md-SFAR criteria. Although VCs occurred in 42 (18.8%) patients, 17 (27.7%) of those patients were classified as ineligible according to MG, whereas 14 (41.2%) were classified as ineligible in the md-SFAR group. In a multiple logistic regression analysis that included md-SFAR, MG, SFAR ≥1.05, peripheral artery disease, and minimum iliofemoral artery diameter, only md-SFAR was the independent predictor of VCs (odds ratio=3.71, 95% confidence interval=1.13-12.53, p=0.031).

CONCLUSION

According to our results, md-SFAR might provide better patient selection to prevent VCs and improve outcomes in TF-TAVI procedures.

Ventral calcification in the common femoral artery: A risk factor for major transcatheter aortic valve intervention access site complications

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify risk factors for major transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) access site complications based on detailed analysis of the preprocedural computed tomography angiogram (CTA).

BACKGROUND

Transfemoral TAVI has become the treatment of choice for severe aortic stenosis in elderly patients, especially with increased perioperative risk. Frailty, however, favors complications at the vascular access site due to the large bore vascular sheath devices necessary for valve deployment.

METHODS

In this monocentric study, we retrospectively analyzed the preprocedural CTA of 417 consecutive patients that received transfemoral TAVI between 2015 and 2019 to quantify vessel diameter, calcification volume and calcified plaque location in detail within 10 cm proximal to the femoral bifurcation.

RESULTS

The mean age of the study cohort was 81.4 ± 6.5 years with a STS of 8 ± 5.2 representing a population at increased periprocedural risk. 54.4% of patients were female. Major vascular access site complications occurred in 8.2% of patients. Major vascular complications correlated statistically with a sheath-to-vessel diameter (SFAR) when measured 1 cm proximal to the femoral bifurcation using a line-derived diameter and ventral calcification within the first 5 cm proximal to the bifurcation. In contrast, overall calcification volume had no influence.

CONCLUSIONS

Transfemoral TAVI harbors a considerable risk for vascular access site complications especially if vessel diameter is too small to comfortably host the sheath diameter at the area of the femoral bifurcation. For preprocedural TAVI planning and risk assessment, location of calcification, especially if located ventrally, seems to be more relevant than consideration of overall calcification alone.

Identifying Patients without a Survival Benefit following Transfemoral and Transapical Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) offers a novel treatment option for patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis, particularly for patients who are unsuitable candidates for surgical intervention. However, high therapeutical costs, socio-economic considerations, and numerous comorbidities make it necessary to target and allocate available resources efficiently. In the present study, we aimed to identify risk factors associated with futile treatment following transfemoral (TF) and transapical (TA) TAVR. Five hundred and thirty-two consecutive patients (82 ± 9 years, female 63%) who underwent TAVR between June 2009 and December 2016 at the Vienna Heart Center Hietzing were retrospectively analyzed to identify predictors of futility, defined as all-cause mortality at one year following the procedure for the overall patient cohort, as well as the TF and TA cohort. Out of 532 patients, 91 (17%) did not survive the first year after TAVR. A multivariate logistic model identified cerebrovascular disease, home oxygen dependency, wheelchair dependency, periinterventional myocardial infarction, and postinterventional renal replacement therapy as the factors independently associated with an increased one-year mortality. Our findings underscore the significance of a precise preinterventional evaluation, as well as illustrating the subtle differences in baseline characteristics in the TF and TA cohort and their impact on one-year mortality.

In-hospital outcomes of transapical versus surgical aortic valve replacement: from the U.S. national inpatient sample

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TA-TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) using a large US population sample.

METHODS

The U.S. National Inpatient Sample was queried for all patients who underwent TA-TAVR or SAVR during the years 2016-2017. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital stroke, pericardiocentesis, pacemaker insertion, mechanical ventilation, vascular complications, major bleeding, acute kidney injury, length of stay, and cost of hospitalization. Outcomes were modeled using multi-variable logistic regression for binary outcomes and generalized linear models for continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 1560 TA-TAVR and 44,280 SAVR patients were included. Patients who underwent TA-TAVR were older and frailer. Compared to SAVR, TA-TAVR correlated with a higher mortality (4.5% vs. 2.7%, effect size (SMD) = 0.1) and higher periprocedural complications. Following multivariable analysis, both TA-TAVR and SAVR had a similar adjusted risk for in-hospital mortality. TA-TAVR correlated with lower odds of bleeding with (adjusted OR (aOR) = 0.26; 95% CI: 0.18-0.38;P < 0.001), and a shorter length of stay (adjusted mean ratio (aMR) = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.69-0.84; P < 0.001), but higher cost (aMR = 1.18; 95% CI: 1.10-1.28; P < 0.001). No significant differences in other study outcomes. In subgroup analysis, TA-TAVR in patients with chronic lung disease had higher odds for mortality (aOR = 3.11; 95%CI: 1.37-7.08; P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

The risk-adjusted analysis showed that TA-TAVR has no advantage over SAVR except for patients with chronic lung disease where TA-TAVR has higher mortality.

Management of aortic stenosis: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and recommendations

Multiple guidelines exist for the management of aortic stenosis (AS). We systematically reviewed current guidelines and recommendations, developed by national or international medical organizations, on management of AS to aid clinical decision-making. Publications in MEDLINE and EMBASE between 1 June 2010 and 15 January 2021 were identified. Additionally, the International Guideline Library, National Guideline Clearinghouse, National Library for Health Guidelines Finder, Canadian Medical Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Infobase, and websites of relevant organizations were searched. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. Two reviewers assessed rigour of guideline development and extracted the recommendations. Of the seven guidelines and recommendations retrieved, five showed considerable rigour of development. Those rigourously developed, agreed on the definition of severe AS and diverse haemodynamic phenotypes, indications and contraindications for intervention in symptomatic severe AS, surveillance intervals in asymptomatic severe AS, and the importance of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) and shared decision-making. Discrepancies exist in age and surgical risk cut-offs for recommending surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) vs. transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), the use of biomarkers and complementary multimodality imaging for decision-making in asymptomatic patients and surveillance intervals for non-severe AS. Contemporary guidelines for AS management agree on the importance of MDT involvement and shared decision-making for individualized treatment and unanimously indicate valve replacement in severe, symptomatic AS. Discrepancies exist in thresholds for age and procedural risk used in choosing between SAVR and TAVI, role of biomarkers and complementary imaging modalities to define AS severity and risk of progression in asymptomatic patients.

Propensity-matched comparison of large-bore access closure in transcatheter aortic valve replacement using MANTA versus Perclose: A real-world experience

OBJECTIVE

Compare two large-bore vascular closure devices (VCDs), collagen-plug-based MANTA and suture-based dual Perclose ProGlide (PP), in patients undergoing contemporary transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

BACKGROUND

The SAFE MANTA IDE clinical trial demonstrated that the collagen-plug-based MANTA VCDs were safe and effective in closing large-bore arteriotomies. However, data comparing this collagen-plug-based VCD to the suture-based VCD in contemporary practice are sparse.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study in which we screened transfemoral (TF) TAVR patients at our institution from 2017 to 2020. Included were those whose large-bore TF access was closed using either MANTA or PP with and without Angio-Seal. Our primary outcome was VCD success. Additional in-hospital outcomes included major and minor vascular complications, post-TAVR length of stay, and mortality.

RESULTS

We screened 696 patients who underwent TAVR. Using propensity scores, we matched 124 patients who received MANTA with 124 patients who received PP. Patients had a mean age of 77.2 years, 69.0% were men, and their mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 3.4%. VCD success was equivalent between VCDs (95.2% vs. 95.2%; p = 1.000). Patients had similar rates of mortality (0% vs. 0.8%; p = .316), and no patients had major vascular complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In contemporary TAVR, the collagen-plug-based MANTA VCD appears to be as safe and effective as the suture-based dual PP VCD, with no differences in VCD success, vascular complications, or mortality. Therefore, selection of VCD for TAVR should be left to operator discretion, taking into account anatomical considerations.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients Who Cannot Undergo Transfemoral Access

INTRODUCTION

 Though transfemoral (TF) access has emerged as a gold standard access for patients with aortic stenosis who undergo transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), there has been no study that has characterized patients who cannot undergo TF access in detail. We aim to evaluate the contraindications for TF access, their incidence, classify them, and provide the outcomes of patients who failed to be TF candidates.

METHODS

 From 925 patients who underwent TAVI between February 2014 and May 2020 at our heart center, 130 patients failed to be TF candidates and underwent transapical-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI). In this study, we included all those patients who failed to be TF candidates and underwent TA-TAVI using the third-generation balloon expandable valve (Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve [S3]) (116 patients; STS score 6.07 ± 4.4; age 79.4 ± 7).

RESULTS

 The incidence of patients unsuitable for TF access at our heart center was 14%. We classified this TAVI population into absolute contraindication for TF access n = 84 (72.5%) and increased interventional risk for TF access n = 32 (27.5%). After TA-TAVI of this specific population using S3, the in-hospital mortality and stroke were 1.7 and 1.7%, respectively. The vascular injury rate was 1.7%. We registered no paravalvular leakage ≥2. The pacemaker rate was 7.4%. The mean transvalvular pressure gradient was 8.7 mm Hg.

CONCLUSION

 The incidence of patients who cannot undergo TF access or who are at high interventional risk is considerably high. TA-TAVI, supported with sufficient interventional experience and appropriate valve system, represents an excellent alternative for patients with distinct vasculopathy.

Twelve-month outcomes of transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis

Introduction

Transapical access (TA) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) (TA-TAVI) represents one of the possible routes in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who are not suitable for transfemoral access.

Aim

To assess early- and mid-term clinical outcomes after TA-TAVI.

Material and methods

Patients with severe symptomatic AS undergoing TA-TAVI from November 2008 to December 2019 were enrolled. Clinical and procedural characteristics as well as clinical outcomes including all-cause mortality during 12-month follow-up were assessed.

Results

Sixty-one consecutive patients underwent TA-TAVI for native AS. Patients were elderly with median age of 80.0 (76.0-84.0) years; 55.7% were males. Median baseline EuroSCORE I and STS scores were 18.2% (11.6-27.7) and 4.8% (3.3-8.2), respectively. The procedural success rate was 96.7%. In-hospital, 30-day and 12-month mortality rates were 9.8%; 18.0% and 24.6%, respectively. The main periprocedural and in-hospital complications were bleeding complications (14.8%). The following factors were associated with 12-month mortality: previous cerebrovascular event (CVE), glomerular filtration rate (GFR), aortic valve area (AVA), right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) and serum level of N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (RR for CVE 3.17, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-8.76: p = 0.026; RR for AVA per 0.1 cm² 1.28, 95% CI: 1.03-1.55: p = 0.024; RR for GFR per 1 ml/min 0.96: 95% CI: 0.94-0.99: p = 0.007; RR for NT-proBNP per 1000 pg/ml 1.07: 95% CI: 1.01-1.17: p = 0.033; RR for RVSP per 1 mm Hg 1.07: 95% CI 1.02-1.16: p = 0.011).

Conclusions

Transapical TAVI in high-risk patients provides good hemodynamic results with acceptable outcomes.

The best way to transcatheter aortic valve implantation: From standard to new approaches

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a safe and beneficial treatment for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at high and intermediate surgical risk. The safety of the procedure continues to improve thanks to more refined procedural approaches and devices but, also and above all, to the accrual of the procedural knowledge and expertise by the operators. The diversification of the approaches and the possibility to tailor the treatment on the individual needs and anatomical features of the patients allows a rapid learning curve in the management of even complications. Indeed, there are several approaches with which TAVI can be carried out: transfemoral arterial, subclavian, transcarotid, transaortic, transaxillary, transapical, and through right anterior thoracotomy. Although transfemoral venous TAVI is less common, it has already have been carried out using caval-aortic punctures. This field is rapidly evolving, and it will be of paramount importance for interventional cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons to keep up to date with further developments. This review intends to give an in-depth and update overview of both conventional and innovative TAVI approaches, with the scope to highlight the relevant advantages, major disadvantages, safety aspects and techniques.

Large-bore arterial access in the era of structural cardiovascular disease

Over the last two decades, the medical community witnessed an outstanding and accelerated development on minimally invasive therapies. The definition of what constitutes large bore access is subject to discussion, however within the field it is generally accepted to reflect a catheter diameter exceeding 8-French. We sought in this review to explore the evolution, characteristics and vascular compatibility of the current commercially available devices, analyze the devices along with access site-specific complications rates and finally review the present methods for percutaneous vascular closure.

National Trends of Outcomes in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) Through Transapical Versus Endovascular Approach: From the National Inpatient Sample (NIS)

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the trends in complication rates following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures according to the type of vascular approach (endovascular vs. transapical) in a large US population sample.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried for all patients diagnosed with aortic stenosis who underwent a TAVR procedure in the United States during the years 2012-2016. Outcomes assessed were peri-procedural mortality, cardiac, and non-cardiac complications. Hospitalization outcomes were modeled using logistic regression for binary outcomes and generalized linear models for continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 97,320 endovascular-TAVR patients and 11,140 transapical-TAVR patients. The mean age was 80.8 years (standard error of the mean: ± 0.1). Most patients were males (53.7%) and Caucasian (87.1%). On multivariate analysis, after adjusting for age, gender, comorbidities, as well as hospital factors, patients with the transapical approach had a higher risk for mortality and adverse outcomes. Among the endovascular-TAVR group, national trends showed a diminishing incidence of procedural mortality (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.77; 95% CI: 0.72-0.84, p < 0.001), stroke (IRR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.73-0.87, p < 0.001), and all secondary outcomes, but no significant change in myocardial infarction. In contrast, most transapical-TAVR related procedural complications remained unchanged over time, except for a significant decrease in stroke, acute respiratory failure and need for pacemaker insertion.

CONCLUSION

National trends show a steady increase in the number of endovascular-TAVR procedures with a concurrent decrease in procedural complications.

Expert Consensus Systems of Care Proposal to Optimize Care for Patients With Valvular Heart Disease Review of the 2019 Document for the Cardiac Anesthesiologist

Valvular heart disease requiring intervention is increasing in prevalence in the adult population. With advancement in transcatheter and surgical procedures for valvular heart disease, optimization of patient selection, availability of resources and personnel, appropriate training and certification, and optimal periprocedural management rely on clinical evaluation, accurate echocardiographic interpretation, and understanding of valvular pathophysiology by the cardiac anesthesiologist. To optimize care and improve access for patients with valvular heart disease the Expert Consensus Systems of Care Document by Nishimura et al.¹ was recently published. The authors propose a protocol with guidelines and performance metrics to create tiered-level valve centers. This review focuses and expands on aspects discussed in Nishimura et al.'s Expert Consensus Systems of Care Document that are relevant to the cardiac anesthesiologist in the periprocedural setting.

A meta-analysis comparing transaxillary and transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Background

While transfemoral (TF) approach is considered as the default access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), the alternative access route of choice remains to be elucidated. Transaxillary (TAx) approach has shown promise as an excellent option. We performed a meta-analysis of the studies comparing the TF and TAx approaches using one type of self-expandable transcatheter valve to avoid device-related bias.

Methods

We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to December 2018 to identify articles comparing TAx-TAVR and TF-TAVR. The studies included in this meta-analysis contain data related to the use of the CoreValve device. Patients' baseline characteristics, procedural outcomes, and clinical outcomes were extracted from the articles and pooled for analysis.

Results

The meta-analysis included five studies comprising 1,414 patients in the TF group and 489 patients in the TAx group. The average EuroScores of the TF and TAx groups were 20.04±13.89 and 22.73±14.73, respectively. The TAx group has higher rates of major comorbidities. No difference was found between the two groups with regard to vascular complications (P=0.71; OR 1.08; 95% CI, 0.71-1.65), aortic regurgitation (P=0.90; OR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.71-1.49), and permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation (P=0.42; OR 1.12; 95% CI, 0.86-1.46). The TAx group has a lower incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) (P=0.05; OR 1.63; 95% CI, 1.01-2.62). No difference was observed in 30-day mortality (P=0.32; OR 1.30; 95% CI, 0.78-2.17) or 1-year mortality (P=0.21; OR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.50-1.16).

Conclusions

TAx-TAVR is associated with overall comparable outcomes to TF TAVR in high-risk patient cohorts, despite higher incidences of major comorbidities in the TAx-TAVR patient population. The rate of AKI appears to be lower after TAx-TAVR.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a focus on transcarotid: a review of the current literature

Valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis has undergone a huge paradigm shift in the recent years in terms of procedural details and vascular access site for patients who have poor peripheral access. Carotid artery is one of the more promising access sites which has been proven to provide a good alternative site with comparable outcomes to transfemoral approach. In this manuscript, we will provide a review of the current literature on transaortic, transapical, transaxillary and transcarotid approaches to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) while focusing on the transcarotid 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.

Non-Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Approach is Associated with a Higher Risk of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

New-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is a frequent arrhythmic complication following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Choice of access routes for TAVR could be a factor that determines the risk of NOAF although the data is still not well-characterised. We aimed to assess the association between different access routes for TAVR (transfemoral versus non-transfemoral) and the risk of NOAF.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was performed through September 2018 using EMBASE and Medline. Eligible studies must compare the incidence of NOAF in patients without pre-existing atrial fibrillation who underwent TAVR. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were extracted from each study and combined together using the random-effects model, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird.

RESULTS

Seven (7) retrospective studies with 18,425 patients who underwent TAVR (12,744 with the transfemoral approach and 5,681 with the non-transfemoral approach) met the eligibility criteria. After the procedures, 2,205 (12.0%) patients developed NOAF (656 [5.1%] patients in the transfemoral group and 1,549 [27.3%] patients in the non-transfemoral group). There was a significant association between the non-transfemoral approach and an increased risk of NOAF with the pooled RR of 2.94 (95%CI, 2.53-3.41; p < 0.00001). Subgroup analysis showed the highest risk of NOAF in the transapical subgroup with the pooled RR of 3.20 (95% CI, 2.69-3.80; I² 33%).

CONCLUSIONS

A significantly increased risk of NOAF following TAVR among those who underwent a non-transfemoral approach compared with transfemoral approach was observed in this meta-analysis.