Transcaval Versus Transaxillary TAVR in Contemporary Practice: A Propensity-Weighted Analysis

Outcomes and Safety of Transcaval Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The transcaval (TCv) vascular approach is increasingly utilized in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), in patients unsuitable for the gold-standard transfemoral approach. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and clinical outcomes associated with TCv-TAVR.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for all articles assessing the TCv approach published until December 2023. Outcomes included 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality (ACM), 30-day rehospitalization, peri-operative and post-operative complications at 30 days. The meta-analysis was registered on the PROSPERO database with the identifier CRD42024501921.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies with 467 patients were included. TCv-TAVR procedures achieved a success rate of 98.5%. TCv-TAVR was associated with a 30-day ACM rate of 6.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.9-8.2%), a one-year ACM rate of 14.4% (95% CI: 2.3- 27.6%) and a 30-day rehospitalization rate at of 4.4% (95% CI: 2.2-10.6%). Postoperative stroke or transient ischemic attack, major vascular complications and major or life-threatening bleeding occurred in 3.9%, 8.5% and 10.1% of cases, respectively. Cumulative meta-analyses showed a trend of decreasing rates of vascular complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The TCv approach in TAVR demonstrated a reassuring efficacy and safety profile, with mortality and post-operative complication rates comparable to those reported for supra-aortic alternative TAVR access routes. The temporal decrease in vascular complications suggests potential improvements in procedural techniques and device technology. These findings further support the TCv approach as a viable option in patients ineligible for the transfemoral access.

Transcaval Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Pure Aortic Regurgitation Using a Dedicated Self-Expanding Device

Novel dedicated devices allow transcatheter treatment of pure aortic regurgitation (AR). The JenaValve Trilogy Heart Valve System was introduced as the first dedicated and on-label AR transcatheter aortic valve replacement system, implementing a locator-based and calcium-independent anchoring mechanism. Here, we present the first-in-human transcatheter aortic valve replacement for pure AR via a transcaval access in a patient with prohibitive alternative arterial accesses.

Trends in transcatheter aortic valve implantation practice and clinical outcomes at an Irish tertiary referral centre

OBJECTIVE

A paucity of data exists on how transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) practice has evolved in Ireland. This study sought to analyse temporal trends in patient demographics, procedural characteristics, and clinical outcomes at an Irish tertiary referral centre.

METHODS

The prospective Mater TAVI database was divided into time tertiles based on when TAVI was performed: Group A, November 2008-April 2013; Group B, April 2013-September 2017; and Group C, September 2017-February 2022. Patient and procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared across groups.

RESULTS

A total of 1063 (Group A, 59; Group B, 268; and Group C:, 736) patients were treated with TAVI during the study period (mean age 81.1±7.4, mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 5.9±5.1).Conscious sedation (Group A, 0%; Group B, 59.9%; and Group C, 90.2%, p<0.001) and femoral artery access (Group A, 76.3%; Group B, 90.7%; and Group C, 96.6%, p<0.001) were used more frequently over time. The median length of hospital stay reduced from 9 days (IQR 7, 18) in Group A to 2 days (IQR 2, 3) in Group C. In-hospital death was numerically higher in Group A compared with Group C (6.8% vs 1.9%, p=0.078). At 1-year follow-up, the rate of death and/or stroke was similar in Group A and Group C (20.3% vs 12.0%, adjusted HR 1.49, 95% CI (0.59 to 3.74)).

CONCLUSION

There was exponential growth in TAVI procedural volume during the study period. A minimalist approach to TAVI emerged, and this was associated with significantly shorter procedure duration and hospital stay. Clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up did not change significantly over time.

Right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement is comparable to left despite challenges

OBJECTIVES

Transaxillary access is the most popular alternative to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Although left transaxillary access is generally preferred, right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement could be challenging because of the opposing axillary artery and aortic curvatures, which may warrant procedural modifications to improve alignment. Our aim is to compare our single center's outcomes for left and right transaxillary access groups and to evaluate procedural modifications for facilitating right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

METHODS

Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared for consecutive left or right axillary TAVRs performed from 6/2016 to 6/2022 with SAPIEN 3. The effects of our previously reported "flip-n-flex" technique on procedural efficiency and new conduction disturbances were subanalyzed in the right axillary group.

RESULTS

Right and left transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement were performed in 25 (18 with the "flip-n-flex" technique) and 26 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between patient characteristics or outcomes. Right axillary subanalysis showed the "flip-n-flex" technique group had significantly shorter fluoroscopy times (21.2 ± 6.2 vs 29.6 ± 12.4 min, p = 0.03) and a trend towards less permanent pacemaker implantation (6.3% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.07) compared to the group without "flip-n-flex".

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, despite anatomical challenges, right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement is comparable to left access. The "flip-n-flex" technique advances right transaxillary as an appealing access for patients with few options.

Transcaval versus Supra-Aortic Vascular Accesses for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

A growing body of evidence suggests that extrathoracic vascular accesses for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) yield favorable outcomes and can be considered as primary alternatives when the gold-standard transfemoral access is contraindicated. Data comparing the transcaval (TCv) to supra-aortic (SAo) approaches (transcarotid, transsubclavian, and transaxillary) for TAVR are lacking. We aimed to compare the outcomes and safety of TCv and SAo accesses for TAVR as alternatives to transfemoral TAVR. A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed by searching PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for all articles comparing TCv-TAVR against SAo-TAVR published until September 2023. Outcomes included in-hospital or 30-day all-cause mortality (ACM) and postoperative complications. A total of three studies with 318 TCv-TAVR and 179 SAo-TAVR patients were included. No statistically significant difference was found regarding in-hospital or 30-day ACM (relative risk [RR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-2.34, p = 0.91), major bleeding, the need for blood transfusions, major vascular complications, and acute kidney injury. TCv-TAVR was associated with a non-statistically significant lower rate of neurovascular complications (RR 0.39, 95%CI 0.14-1.09, p = 0.07). These results suggest that both approaches may be considered as first-line alternatives to transfemoral TAVR, depending on local expertise and patients' anatomy. Additional data from long-term cohort studies are needed.

Percutaneous transaxillary approach through the first segment of the axillary artery for the Impella-supported PCI Versus TAVR

Percutaneous transaxillary approach (PTAX) through the first segment of the axillary artery is not widely recognized as a safe method. Furthermore, PTAX has never been directly compared between Impella-supported percutaneous coronary interventions (Impella-PCI) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of PTAX through the first axillary segment in Impella-PCI versus TAVR. In cases where standard imaging guidance was insufficient, a technique involving puncturing the axillary artery "on-the-balloon" was employed. The endpoints were bleeding and vascular complications, as defined by BARC and VARC-3 criteria. PTAX was successfully performed in all 46 attempted cases: 23 for Impella-PCI and 23 for TAVR. Strict adherence to BARC and VARC-3 criteria led to the frequent identification of major bleeding (57%) and a moderately frequent diagnosis of vascular complications (17%). These incidences were primarily based on post-procedural hemoglobin reduction (> 3 g/dl) but not overt bleeding. The Impella group exhibited a higher rate of BARC 3b bleeding due to a greater hemoglobin decline resulting from the prolonged implant duration and PCI itself. Left axillary access was linked to smaller blood loss. Bleeding and vascular complications, as per BARC and VARC-3 definitions, did not affect short-term prognosis, with only 3 Impella patients succumbing to heart failure unrelated to the procedures during one-month follow-up period.

Association Between Polyvascular Disease and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes: Insights From the STS/ACC TVT Registry

BACKGROUND

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is highly prevalent in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Polyvascular disease (PVD), defined as involvement of ≥2 vascular beds (VBs), that is, coronary, cerebrovascular, or peripheral, portends a poor prognosis in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; however, data on the association of PVD with outcomes of patients undergoing TAVR are limited.

METHODS

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry was analyzed to identify patients who underwent TAVR from November 2011 to March 2022. The exposure of interest was PVD. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included major vascular complications, major/life-threatening bleeding, myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack/stroke, and valve- and non-valve-related readmissions. Outcomes were assessed at 30 days and 1 year.

RESULTS

Of 443 790 patients who underwent TAVR, PVD was present in 150 823 (34.0%; 111 425 [25.1%] with 2VB-PVD and 39 398 [8.9%] with 3VB-PVD). On multivariable analysis, PVD was associated with increased all-cause mortality at 1 year (hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.14-1.20]). There was an incremental increase in 1-year mortality with an increasing number of VBs involved (no PVD [reference]; 2VB-PVD: hazard ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.09-1.15]: and 3VB-PVD: hazard ratio, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.26-1.36]). Patients with versus without PVD had higher rates of major vascular complications, major/life-threatening bleeding, transient ischemic attack/stroke, and non-valve-related readmissions at 30 days and 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

PVD is associated with worse outcomes after TAVR, and the risk is highest in patients with 3VB-PVD.

Transcarotid versus transaxillary access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a self-expanding valve: A propensity-matched analysis

Transaxillary access has been the most frequently used nonfemoral access route for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expanding valve. Use of transcarotid TAVR is increasing; however, comparative data on these methods are limited. We compared outcomes following transcarotid or transaxillary TAVR with a self-expanding, supra-annular valve.

Methods

The Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry was queried for TAVR procedures using transaxillary and transcarotid access between July 2015 and June 2021. Patients received a self-expanding Evolut R, PRO, or PRO + valve (Medtronic) and had 1-year follow-up. Thirty-day and 1-year outcomes were compared in transcarotid and transaxillary groups after 1:2 propensity score-matching. Multivariable regression models were fitted to identify predictors of key end points.

Results

The propensity score-matched cohort included 576 patients receiving transcarotid and 1142 receiving transaxillary access. Median procedure time (99 vs 118 minutes; P < .001) and hospital stay (2 vs 3 days; P < .001) were shorter with transcarotid versus transaxillary access. At 30 days, patients with transcarotid access had similar mortality (Kaplan-Meier estimates 3.7% vs 4.3%, P = .57) but significantly lower stroke (3.1% vs 5.9%; P = .017) and mortality or stroke (6.0% vs 8.9%; P = .033) compared with patients receiving transaxillary access. Similar differences were observed at 1 year. Transaxillary access was associated with increased risk of 30-day stroke (hazard ratio, 2.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-3.58) by multivariable regression analysis.

Conclusions

Transcarotid versus transaxillary access for TAVR using a self-expanding valve is associated with procedural benefits and significantly lower stroke and mortality or stroke at 30 days. In patients with unsuitable femoral anatomy, transcarotid access may be the preferred delivery route for self-expanding valves.

Vascular access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The choice of an alternative access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains controversial when transfemoral (TF) access is not feasible.

METHODS

We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of TAVR via various peripheral vascular accesses. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through July 2022 to identify studies that investigated outcomes in patients who underwent TAVR via TF, trans-subclavian (Tsc), transcarotid (TC), or transcaval (Tcav) access. A network meta-analysis was conducted via random-effects model. Outcomes of interest were major or life-threatening bleeding, stroke, major vascular complication, and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

No randomized trial was identified. Our analysis included 33 observational studies that enrolled a total of 43,455 patients who underwent TAVR via TF (n = 36,202), Tsc (n = 3869), TC (n = 3066), or Tcav (n = 318) access. The risk of major or life-threatening bleeding was higher via Tsc compared with TF [odds ratio (OR); 95 % confidence interval (CI) =1.51 (1.03-2.23), p = 0.034]. The risk of stroke was higher via Tsc compared with TF and Tcav [OR (95 % CI) =2.00 (1.14-3.52), p = 0.018, OR (95 % CI) =2.43 (1.03-5.74), p = 0.044, respectively]. The risk of major vascular complications was lower via TC compared with Tsc, and Tcav and higher with Tcav compared with TF and Tsc. 30-day mortality was higher via Tsc compared with TF. Tsc was associated with higher risk of major or life-threatening bleeding compared with TF, and higher risk of stroke compared to TF and Tcav. Tcav had the highest risk of major vascular complications.

CONCLUSION

In patients who underwent TF, Tsc, TC, or Tcav TAVR, Tsc had a higher rate of stroke compared to TF and Tcav, and major or life-threatening bleeding compared to TF. The rate of major vascular complications in Tcav was the highest among the four approaches.

Outcomes of Alternative Access Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Procedures

Alternative access transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) consists primarily of 4 different options: transcaval, transaxillary, transcarotid, and transapical. While many centers have a preferred alternative access site, few papers have compared the outcomes of TAVR with each alternative access site. In this review, we examine the outcomes of TAVR at each alternative access site, focusing on mortality, stroke, bleeding, pacemaker insertion, paravalvular leakage, and discharge to home. Notable findings include higher mortality in the transapical group and higher stroke rate in the transaxillary group. On the basis of these data, we suggest that transcarotid TAVR might represent the second choice of approach for TAVR when alternate access is required.

Cutting balloon for femoral arterial and venus obstructions due to suture-based closure devices: Case series

Suture-based vascular closure devices have been shown to be effective in hemostasis for procedures with vascular access. However, iatrogenic vascular occlusion may occur. The cutting balloon (CB) is a noncompliant balloon wrapped with 3-4 microsurgical blades that are intended to modify vascular lesions, but it may also be utilized to cut and release endovascular sutures. We report two cases in which the CB was employed as a bailout strategy to alleviate suture-related vascular occlusion after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The CB can be effectively utilized to resolve suture-related vascular occlusion.

Transcatheter Electrosurgery: A Narrative Review

Transcatheter electrosurgery describes the ability to cut and traverse tissue, at a distance, without an open surgical field and is possible using either purpose-built or off-the-shelf devices. Tissue traversal requires focused delivery of radiofrequency energy to a guidewire tip. Initially employed to cross atretic pulmonary valves, tissue traversal has enabled transcaval aortic access, recanalization of arterial and venous occlusions, transseptal access, and many other techniques. To cut tissue, the selectively denuded inner curvature of a kinked guidewire (the Flying-V) or a single-loop snare is energized during traction. Adjunctive techniques may complement or enable contemporary transcatheter procedures, whereas myocardial slicing or excision of ectopic masses may offer definitive therapy. In this contemporary review we discuss the principles of transcatheter electrosurgery, and through exemplary clinical applications highlight the range of therapeutic options offered by this versatile family of procedures.

TAVR in 2023: Who Should Not Get It?

Since the first transcatheter delivery of an aortic valve prosthesis was performed by Cribier et al in 2002, the picture of aortic stenosis (AS) therapeutics has changed dramatically. Initiated from an indication of inoperable to high surgical risk, extending to intermediate and low risk, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is now an approved treatment for patients with severe, symptomatic AS across all the risk categories. The current evidence supports TAVR as a frontline therapy for treating severe AS. The crucial question remains concerning the subset of patients who still are not ideal candidates for TAVR because of certain inherent anatomic, nonmodifiable, and procedure-specific factors. Therefore, in this study, we focus on these scenarios and reasons for referring selected patients for surgical aortic valve replacement in 2023.

Transcaval Access and Closure Best Practices

Transcaval aortic access is a versatile electrosurgical technique for large-bore arterial access through the wall of the abdominal aorta from the adjoining inferior vena cava. Although counterintuitive, its relative safety derives from the recognition that interstitial hydraulic pressure exceeds venous pressure, so arterial bleeding harmlessly decompresses into the nearby caval venous hole. Transcaval access has been performed in thousands of patients for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and endovascular thoracic aneurysm repair and to avoid limb ischemia in percutaneous mechanical circulatory support. Transcaval access may have value compared with transaxillary or subclavian access and with surgical transcarotid access when standard transfemoral access is not optimal. The dissemination of transcaval access and closure techniques has been hampered by the unavailability of commercially marketed devices. This state-of-the-art review details exemplary transcaval technique, patient selection, computed tomographic planning, step-by-step access and closure, management of complications, and procedural troubleshooting in special situations. These contemporary best practices can help operators gain or maintain proficiency.

Vascular Access in Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease Undergoing TAVR: The Hostile Registry

BACKGROUND

The optimal access route in patients with severe peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains undetermined.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare clinical outcomes with transfemoral access (TFA), transthoracic access (TTA), and nonthoracic transalternative access (TAA) in TAVR patients with severe PAD.

METHODS

Patients with PAD and hostile femoral access (TFA impossible, or possible only after percutaneous treatment) undergoing TAVR at 28 international centers were included in this registry. The primary endpoint was the propensity-adjusted risk of 30-day major adverse events (MAE) defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), or main access site-related Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 major vascular complications. Outcomes were also stratified according to the severity of PAD using a novel risk score (Hostile score).

RESULTS

Among the 1,707 patients included in the registry, 518 (30.3%) underwent TAVR with TFA after percutaneous treatment, 642 (37.6%) with TTA, and 547 (32.0%) with TAA (mostly transaxillary). Compared with TTA, both TFA (adjusted HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.75) and TAA (adjusted HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.47-0.78) were associated with lower 30-day rates of MAE, driven by fewer access site-related complications. Composite risks at 1 year were also lower with TFA and TAA compared with TTA. TFA compared with TAA was associated with lower 1-year risk of stroke/TIA (adjusted HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.24-0.98), a finding confined to patients with low Hostile scores (P_interaction = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with PAD undergoing TAVR, both TFA and TAA were associated with lower 30-day and 1-year rates of MAE compared with TTA, but 1-year stroke/TIA rates were higher with TAA compared with TFA.

Bleeding Events After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has gained over time a major reduction in procedural complications. Despite this, clinically relevant bleeding still occurs in a non-negligible proportion of patients and adversely affects prognosis. Patients with severe aortic stenosis are at heightened risk for spontaneous bleeding due to advanced age and a high comorbidity burden. Also, procedural factors and antithrombotic management contribute to define individual bleeding susceptibility. Bleeding prevention represents an emerging area for improving patient care. Because of the tight hemorrhagic/ischemic balance, a tailored approach based on individual bleeding-risk profile, such as a less invasive antithrombotic regimen or appropriate diagnostic preprocedural evaluation, should be pursued to avoid bleeding events. This review aims to provide an in-depth overview of bleeding events in the TAVR field, including definitions, timing and the extent of risk, and clinical impact, as well as updates on antithrombotic management and its potential influence on bleeding complications.

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.

Advances in technology and techniques for transcatheter aortic valve replacement with concomitant peripheral arterial disease

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a prevalent disease affecting 3.7% of the adult population aged 65 or above. In the past, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was the only definitive therapy available for the treatment of severe AS. Owing to the invasive nature of open-heart surgery, patients with advanced age and frailty could not benefit from SAVR. The advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the past decade has offered an alternative treatment option for patients with severe AS, particularly those who are deemed to have high surgical risks. Nevertheless, a large proportion of patients also have concomitant peripheral arterial disease (PAD), which increases the risk of peri-procedural vascular complication, and precludes the possibility of transfemoral TAVR owing to inadequate luminal size for delivery system deployment. In this review, the prevalence and outcome of TAVR patients with PAD will be discussed. Furthermore, novel technologies and techniques that enable TAVR to be safely performed using transfemoral or alternative access in patients with severe PAD will be reviewed.