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

Dual ProGlide versus ProGlide and Angio-Seal for Femoral Access Hemostasis after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Randomized Comparative Trial

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications increase morbidity and mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacements(TAVR), often related to failures in vascular closure devices(VCD). We intended to compare the dual Perclose ProGlide(PP) strategy to the hybrid combination of PP and Angio-Seal(AS) for femoral access hemostasis after TAVR.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial with 257 patients comparing dual PP to one PP and one AS(AS+PP) for vascular closure after transfemoral TAVR was conducted. The primary endpoint was the composite of TAVR access site-related vascular complications and life-threatening type 2/3 or 1 bleeding according to VARC-3. Secondary endpoints included additional VCD use and significant peripheral ischemia related to arteriotomy closure within one year. Modified VCD failure, defined as failure to achieve hemostasis within 5 minutes or requiring additional endovascular maneuvers, was also recorded.

RESULTS

The AS+PP combination yielded lower rates of the primary endpoint(18.2% vs 29.8%; p = 0.0381), vascular complication(18.2% vs 29.8%; p = 0.0381), additional VCD usage(0.8% vs 19.0%; p < 0.0001), and modified VCD failure(9.9% vs 33.1%; p < 0.0001) than the dual PP. Bleeding complication rates were similar between the two groups. Three-month follow-up vascular duplex tests showed similar common femoral artery(CFA) diameters and peak systolic velocities(PSV) between the two groups, but additional intervention had higher PSV and smaller CFA diameters than those without.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined PP+AS for large-bore femoral access hemostasis following TAVR promises to be more effective and safer than dual PP in terms of vascular complications. Moreover, additional intervention for vascular complications resulted in smaller CFA diameters(ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05491070).

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.

Pacing Using Cardiac Implantable Electric Device During TAVR: 10-Year Experience of a High-Volume Center

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an effective and safe therapy for severe aortic stenosis. Rapid or fast pacing is required for implantation, which can be performed via a pre-existing cardiac implantable electric device (CIED). However, safety data on CIEDs for pacing in TAVR are missing.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to elucidate procedural safety and feasibility of internal pacing with a CIED in TAVR.

METHODS

Patients undergoing TAVR with a CIED were included in this analysis. Baseline characteristics, procedural details, and complications according to Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 (VARC-3) criteria after TAVR were compared between both groups.

RESULTS

A total of 486 patients were included. Pacing was performed using a CIED in 150 patients and a transient pacemaker in 336 patients. No differences in technical success according to VARC-3 criteria or procedure duration occurred between the groups. The usage of transient pacers for pacing was associated with a significantly higher bleeding rate (bleeding type ≥2 according to VARC-3-criteria; 2.0% vs 13.1%; P < 0.01). Furthermore, impairment of the CIED appeared in 2.3% of patients after TAVR only in the group in which pacing was performed by a transient pacer, leading to surgical revision of the CIED in 1.3% of all patients when transient pacemakers were used.

CONCLUSIONS

Internal pacing using a CIED is safe and feasible without differences of procedural time and technical success and might reduce bleeding rates. Furthermore, pacing using a CIED circumvents the risk of lead dislocation. Our data provide an urgent call for the use of a CIED for pacing during a TAVR procedure in general.

Strategies to Minimize Access Site-related Complications in Patients Undergoing Transfemoral Artery Procedures with Large-bore Devices

Large bore accesses refer to accesses with a diameter of 10 French or greater and are necessary for various medical devices, including those used in transcatheter aortic valve replacement, endovascular aneurysm repair stent-grafts, and percutaneous mechanical support devices. Notably, the utilization of these devices via femoral access is steadily increasing due to advancements in technology and implantation techniques, which are expanding the pool of patients suitable for percutaneous procedures. However, procedures involving large bore devices carry a high risk of bleeding and vascular complications (VCs), impacting both morbidity and long-term mortality. In this review article, we will first discuss the incidence, determinants, and prognostic impact of VCs in patients undergoing large bore access procedures. Subsequently, we will explore the strategies developed in recent years to minimize VCs, including techniques for optimizing vascular puncture through femoral cannulation, such as the use of echo-guided access cannulation and fluoroscopic guidance. Additionally, we will evaluate existing vascular closure devices designed for large bore devices. Finally, we will consider new pharmacological strategies aimed at reducing the risk of periprocedural access-related bleeding.

Impact of transradial versus transfemoral access for preprocedural coronary angiography on TAVR-associated complications

Background

Vascular injury and bleeding complications remain frequent after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Whether the access-site of preprocedural coronary angiography (CAG) affects TAVR-related complications is not known. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of transradial (TRA) versus transfemoral access (TFA) for preprocedural CAG on outcomes in patients undergoing subsequent TAVR.

Methods

The study cohort included 1002 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR, of whom 39.4% (395/1002) had undergone radial and 60.6% (607/1002) femoral access for pre-TAVR CAG. The primary endpoint was a composite of 30-day mortality and major vascular complications after TAVR. Key secondary endpoints included VARC-3-defined complications.

Results

The primary endpoint occurred less frequently in patients with prior TRA (3.3%) as compared to patients with prior TFA (6.3%, p = 0.04), which was mainly driven by significantly lower rates of major vascular complications (0.8% vs 2.5%, p = 0.05). Moreover, incidences of periprocedural access-related vascular injury and unplanned endovascular interventions were lower in TRA patients (13.2% vs 18.0%, p = 0.05). The rate of major bleeding tended to be lower in the TRA (1.5%) as compared to the TFA group (3.5%) but was not significantly different (p = 0.07). Moreover, the rate of life-threatening bleeding was comparable between both groups (0.5% vs 0.8%, p = 0.71).

Conclusion

Transradial access for preprocedural CAG was associated with significantly lower rates of vascular complications following subsequent TAVR as compared to transfemoral access. However, despite the tendency to lower major bleedings with transradial access, no significant association was detectable between the access-site of coronary angiography and TAVR-related bleeding complications.

Comparison of plug-based versus suture-based vascular closure for large-bore arterial access: a collaborative meta-analysis of observational and randomized studies

BACKGROUND

Large-bore arteriotomies can be percutaneously closed with suture-based or plug-based vascular closure device (VCD) strategies. The efficacy of both techniques remains controversial.

AIMS

We conducted a meta-analysis of comparative studies between both VCD strategies, focusing on the most commonly applied VCDs (MANTA and ProGlide).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google scholar for observational studies (OS) and randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing vascular closure with the MANTA-based and the ProGlide-based technique. The principal endpoint of this analysis was access-site related vascular complications. Both study types were analyzed separately.

RESULTS

Access-site related vascular complications were less frequent after vascular closure with the MANTA technique in the analysis of OS (RR 0.61 [95%CI 0.43-0.89], p = 0.01, I2 = 0%), but more frequent in the analysis of RCT data (RR 1.70 [95%CI 1.16-2.51], p = 0.01, I2 = 0%). Both data sets provided no significant difference between the VCD techniques in terms of overall bleeding events (OS: RR 0.57 [95%CI 0.32-1.02], p = 0.06, I2 = 70%; and RCT: RR 1.37 [95%CI 0.82-2.28], p = 0.23, I2 = 30%). RCT data showed that endovascular stenting or vascular surgery due to VCD failure occurred more often after MANTA application (RR 3.53 [95%CI 1.07-11.33], p = 0.04, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

While OS point to favorable outcomes for large-bore vascular closure with the MANTA-based technique, RCT data show that this strategy is associated with more access-site related vascular complications as well as endovascular stenting or vascular surgery due to device failure compared with the ProGlide-based technique.

Outcomes with plug-based versus suture-based vascular closure device after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing plug-based (i.e., MANTA) with suture-based (i.e., ProStar XL and ProGlide) vascular closure devices (VCDs) for large-bore access closure after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have yielded mixed results.

AIMS

To examine the comparative safety and efficacy of both types of VCDs among TAVR recipients.

METHODS

An electronic database search was performed through March 2022 for studies comparing access-site related vascular complications with plug-based versus suture-based VCDs for large-bore access site closure after transfemoral (TF) TAVR.

RESULTS

Ten studies (2 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 8 observational studies) with 3113 patients (MANTA = 1358, ProGlide/ProStar XL = 1755) were included. There was no difference between plug-based and suture-based VCD in the incidence of access-site major vascular complications (3.1% vs. 3.3%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-1.53). The incidence of VCD failure was lower in plug-based VCD (5.2% vs. 7.1%, OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.44-0.91). There was a trend toward a higher incidence of unplanned vascular intervention in plug-based VCD (8.2% vs. 5.9%, OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 0.97-1.89). Length of stay was shorter with MANTA. Subgroup analyses suggested significant interaction based on study designs such that there was higher incidence of access-site vascular complications and bleeding events with plug-based versus suture-based VCD among RCTs.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing TF-TAVR, large-bore access site closure with plug-based VCD was associated with a similar safety profile as suture-based VCD. However, subgroup analysis showed that plug-based VCD was associated with higher incidence of vascular and bleeding complications in RCTs.

A 20-year journey in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Evolution to current eminence

Since the first groundbreaking procedure in 2002, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionized the management of aortic stenosis (AS). Through striking developments in pertinent equipment and techniques, TAVI has now become the leading therapeutic strategy for aortic valve replacement in patients with severe symptomatic AS. The procedure streamlining from routine use of conscious sedation to a single arterial access approach, the newly adapted implantation techniques, and the introduction of novel technologies such as intravascular lithotripsy and the refinement of valve-bioprosthesis devices along with the accumulating experience have resulted in a dramatic reduction of complications and have improved associated outcomes that are now considered comparable or even superior to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). These advances have opened the road to the use of TAVI in younger and lower-risk patients and up-to-date data from landmark studies have now established the outstanding efficacy and safety of TAVI in patients with low-surgical risk impelling the most recent ESC guidelines to propose TAVI, as the main therapeutic strategy for patients with AS aged 75 years or older. In this article, we aim to summarize the most recent advances and the current clinical aspects involving the use of TAVI, and we also attempt to highlight impending concerns that need to be further addressed.

Dual ProGlide versus ProGlide and FemoSeal for vascular access haemostasis after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

Large-bore arteriotomy for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) requires percutaneous vascular closure devices, but real-world data comparing different closure strategies are limited.

AIMS

We sought to compare a dual ProGlide strategy vs a combination of one ProGlide and one FemoSeal for vascular closure after TAVI.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 874 propensity score-matched patients undergoing TAVI at the Munich University Hospital from August 2018 to October 2020. From August 2018 to August 2019, a dual ProGlide strategy was used for vascular closure. From October 2019 to October 2020, a combination of one ProGlide and one FemoSeal was used. The primary endpoint was defined as access-related major vascular complications or bleeding ≥Type 2 according to Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 criteria.

RESULTS

Patients in the dual ProGlide group (n=437) had a higher incidence of the primary endpoint than patients treated with one ProGlide and one FemoSeal (n=437; 11.4% vs 3.0%; p<0.001). Furthermore, they had a higher rate of closure device failure (2.7% vs 0.9%; p=0.044) and more often required unplanned surgery or endovascular treatment (3.9% vs 0.9%; p=0.004). The incidence of death did not differ significantly between groups (3.4% vs 1.6%; p=0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

A combined ProGlide and FemoSeal strategy might have the potential to reduce access-related vascular complications following TAVI.

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.

Managing complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

INTRODUCTION

Although transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become a streamlined and standardized procedure, different complications still remain and need the operators to be properly trained about their management.

AREAS COVERED

This review article aims at offering a practical overview of the most impactful TAVI complications, analyzing, and discussing the potential risk factors, and focusing on the available strategies for their management.

EXPERT OPINION

Complications following TAVI have been decreasing thanks to technical advancements and operators experience. The thorough knowledge of potential complications and their prevention played a key role in the decreasing of complications rates. Pre-procedural, computed tomography angiography assessment of patient's anatomical characteristics, allows to properly choose and tailor the best strategy for managing complications in most of cases. Nevertheless, further research is required to shed lights about the optimal strategies to adopt for managing TAVI complications.

MANTA Versus Suture-based Closure Devices Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: An Updated Meta-analysis

Background

Vascular access closure is essential in large-bore arteriotomy procedures, such as transcatheter aortic valve replacement. ​Suture-based devices are frequently used for vascular access closure. MANTA (Teleflex) is a collagen plug-based device used to achieve hemostasis with evolving efficacy and safety data. This study aimed to evaluate plug-based versus suture-based closure devices following large-bore arteriotomy procedures.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review searching PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (inception through November 2021) for studies evaluating plug-based versus suture-based closure devices following large-bore arteriotomy procedures. We performed a meta-analysis comparing the length of stay, device failure, mortality, bleeding, and vascular complications between these 2 types of devices.

Results

Eleven studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 9 observational studies) with a total of 3123 patients were included in this analysis. Compared with suture-based devices, plug-based devices were associated with a significant decrease in the length of stay (standardized mean difference: -0.14; 95% CI, -0.25 to -0.03) and vascular closure device failure (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44-0.91) following the procedure. There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality, major or minor bleeding, and major or minor vascular complications between plug-based and suture-based closure devices.

Conclusions

Plug-based vascular closure devices were associated with a shorter length of stay and lower risk of device failure following large-bore arteriotomy procedures without differences in mortality, bleeding, or vascular complications than suture-based closure devices.

Antithrombotic Therapy Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Due to a large technical improvement in the past decade, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has expanded to lower-surgical-risk patients with symptomatic and severe aortic stenosis. While mortality rates related to TAVR are decreasing, the prognosis of patients is still impacted by ischemic and bleeding complications, and defining the optimal antithrombotic regimen remains a priority. Recent randomized control trials reported lower bleeding rates with an equivalent risk in ischemic outcomes with single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) when compared to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients without an underlying indication for anticoagulation. In patients requiring lifelong oral anticoagulation (OAC), the association of OAC plus antiplatelet therapy leads to a higher risk of bleeding events with no advantages on mortality or ischemic outcomes. Considering these data, guidelines have recently been updated and now recommend SAPT and OAC alone for TAVR patients without and with a long-term indication for anticoagulation. Whether a direct oral anticoagulant or vitamin K antagonist provides better outcomes in patients in need of anticoagulation remains uncertain, as recent trials showed a similar impact on ischemic and bleeding outcomes with apixaban but higher gastrointestinal bleeding with edoxaban. This review aims to summarize the most recently published data in the field, as well as describe unresolved issues.

Management and endovascular therapy of ureteroarterial fistulas: experience from a single center and review of the literature

Background

Ureteroarterial fistula (UAF) is a rare but potentially life threatening disease. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of endovascular therapy for UAF treatment.

Methods

This retrospective case series evaluates a single center experience of percutaneous stent graft (SG) angioplasty and/or coil embolization for UAF. Patient follow-up included technical and early clinical success, complications and revisional procedures. We also conducted a systematic review of the literature reporting on endovascular UAF management.

Results

We identified 17 UAF in 16 patients (12 male, 4 female, mean age 69.8 ± 11.3 years) who underwent endovascular UAF therapy at our tertiary hospital. All patients presented with hematuria. 5/17 (29.4%) presented with flank pain, in 7 (41.2%) cases patients were in hypovolemic shock. Risk factors of UAF included chronic indwelling ureteral stents in all fistulas, major pelvic surgery in 13 cases (76.5%). In 6 cases (35.3%) SG were placed from the common iliac artery (CIA) to the external iliac artery (EIA) following coil embolization of the proximal internal iliac artery (IIA). SG placement without previous coil embolization was performed in 10 fistulas (58.8%). In one case only coil embolization of the IIA was performed. Mean follow-up was 654 (range: 1–3269) days. All procedures were technically successful and no procedure related deaths occurred during follow-up. During the initial hospital stay hematuria disappeared in 14/17 cases (82.4%). Overall, four patients suffered recurrent hematuria, which in three cases resolved after a secondary intervention. One recurrent UAF related death occurred during follow-up 229 days after initial treatment.

A total of 152 UAF cases were additionally analyzed from our systematic literature review: SG placement with or without embolization was performed in 140 cases (92.1%) while embolization alone was done in 12 cases (7.9%). Complications included UAF recurrence (18/152, 11.8%), SG thrombosis (7/140, 5%), and SG infections (5/140, 3.6%) with an overall complications rate of 13.8%. Five patients died due to UAF (3.3%).

Conclusion

Endovascular therapy offers high technical success rates and rapid bleeding control of UAF. Severe complications like SG occlusions or SG infections are rare but significant. Antibiotic treatment and single anti-platelet therapy improve SG durability as well as close and long follow-up to timely perform repeated endovascular or surgical treatment if necessary.

Evidence-based medicine

Level 4, case series.

Complications of the MANTA closure device. Insights from MAUDE database

BACKGROUND

The collagen-based MANTA device (Teleflex, PA, USA) is used for closure of large-bore vascular access. There is a paucity of data on complications associated with its use in a real-life setting.

METHODS

We queried the "Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience" MAUDE database between February 2019 and December 2020 for reports on MANTA device.

RESULTS

We identified 250 reports in the MAUDE database from February 2019 through December 2020. The most common failure complication of MANTA is persistent bleeding (48.8%) and vessel occlusion or stenosis (29.6%). Most complications were managed successfully with an endovascular approach (48.4%), but a high number of patients required surgical intervention (40.4%). The most commonly reported failure mechanism was the failure of deployment (22%) followed by subcutaneous deployment (7.6%), intraluminal deployment (4.8%) amd detachment of collagen (2.8%). Access site infection was rare (1.2%). The 18 Fr. MANTA was associated with a lower risk of failure of deployment compared with the 14 Fr. device but was associated with a higher risk of vessel occlusion or stenosis (32.4% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.04) and thrombosis (11.6% vs 0%, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The most common complication of the MANTA device reported to the MAUDE registry was persistent bleeding (48.8% of reports) followed by vessel occlusion (29.6%). These complications were managed successfully using an endovascular approach in 48.4% of the reports.

Efficacy and Safety of ProGlide Versus Prostar XL Vascular Closure Devices in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: The RISPEVA Registry

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) requires large‐bore access, which is associated with bleeding and vascular complications. ProGlide and Prostar XL are vascular closure devices widely used in clinical practice, but their comparative efficacy and safety in TAVR is a subject of debate, owing to conflicting results among published studies. We aimed to compare outcomes with Proglide versus Prostar XL vascular closure devices after TAVR.

Methods and Results

This large‐scale analysis was conducted using RISPEVA, a multicenter national prospective database of patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR treated with ProGlide versus Prostar XL vascular closure devices. Both multivariate and propensity score adjustments were performed. A total of 2583 patients were selected. Among them, 1361 received ProGlide and 1222 Prostar XL. The predefined primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, bleeding, and vascular complications assessed at 30 days and 1‐year follow‐up. At 30 days, there was a significantly greater reduction of the primary end point with ProGlide versus Prostar XL (13.8% versus 20.5%, respectively; multivariate adjusted odds ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.65–0.99]; P=0.043), driven by a reduction of bleeding complications (9.1% versus 11.7%, respectively; multivariate adjusted odds ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.58–0.98]; P=0.046). Propensity score analysis confirmed the significant reduction of major adverse cardiovascular events and bleeding risk with ProGlide. No significant differences in the primary end point were found between the 2 vascular closure devices at 1 year of follow‐up (multivariate adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.72–1.10]; P=0.902). Comparable results were obtained by propensity score analysis. During the procedure, compared with Prostar XL, ProGlide yielded significant higher device success (99.2% versus 97.5%, respectively; P=0.001).

Conclusions

ProGlide has superior efficacy as compared with Prostar XL in TAVR procedures and is associated with a greater reduction of composite adverse events at short‐term, driven by lower bleeding complications.

Registration Information

URL: clini​caltr​ials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02713932.

Access site related vascular complications with third generation transcatheter heart valve systems

OBJECTIVES

This study examines the impact of anatomical and procedural factors on Valve Academic Research Consortium-2-defined vascular complications at the femoral access site in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with third generation transcatheter heart valve (THV)-systems.

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials reported on vascular complications with current THV-systems. However, clinical presentation and consequences of these events are not well studied.

METHODS

All patients who underwent a transfemoral TAVR using an Edwards Sapien3®/Sapien3ultra® or a Medtronic Evolut-R®/Evolut-PRO® have been identified from our institutional database. Only procedures utilizing the PerClose-ProGlide® vascular closure device were included. Risk factors for vascular complications were analyzed with a logistic regression model. Preoperative and procedural data were collected. The postoperative course of patients with and without vascular complications was compared.

RESULTS

A total of 878 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 152 patients (17.3%) had an access-site related vascular complication (87 major complications, 9.9%). Sheath-to-femoral-artery-ratio (SFAR) (OR per 0.1 increase = 1.35, p < .001) and more than 2 vessel entries with large bore sheaths (OR = 1.76, p = .029) were independent risk factors for vascular complications. Female gender (OR = 1.44, p = .07) and two vessel entries with large bore sheaths (OR = 1.2, p = .53) increased the risk, although no statistical significance was shown. Age (OR = 1.07, p = .62), body mass index (OR = 1.1 per 5 points, p = .32) and vessel wall calcification at puncture site (OR = 0.93, p = .7) had no influence on vascular complications. Patients with vascular complications had a higher need for blood transfusion (p < .001) and a higher in-hospital mortality (2.6 vs. 0.4%, p = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

Procedural risk assessment should include SFAR calculation and consider the need for large bore sheath exchange. This might reduce the vascular trauma, lower vascular complication rates and improve the clinical outcome after TAVR.