Transfemoral versus transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a single-centre experience

Transapical TAVI: Survival, Hemodynamics, Devices and Machine Learning. Lessons Learned After 10-Year Experience

Aim of this single-center, retrospective study was to assess early and long-term clinical and hemodynamic results of transapical aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI), and to identify predictors of survival at follow-up. All patients undergoing TA-TAVI for severe aortic valve stenosis at our institution were reviewed. A hybrid approach based on machine-learning techniques was employed to identify survival predictors, using a Bagging-Decision-Tree algorithm and a Random-Forest algorithm, respectively. Two-hundred-thirty-four consecutive patients underwent TA-TAVI (March 2009-May 2019). All-cause 30-day mortality was 5.1%. Device success was 95.7%. Median follow-up time was 35.2 months. Kaplan-Meier overall survival rates at 2, 5, and 8 years were 75%, 44%, and 15%, respectively. Structural-valve-deterioration occurred in 25 patients (11.3%) overall. The strongest predictors of survival at follow-up were age, body-mass-index, and ejection fraction. TA-TAVI provided valid early and long-term outcomes. These data support its choice as an optimal alternative access whenever the transfemoral route is not feasible.

Similar 5-Year Survival in Transfemoral and Transapical TAVI Patients: A Single-Center Experience

Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI) is generally considered to be associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation TAVI (TF-TAVI). We aimed to compare different patient risk profiles, access-related complications, and long-term survival using inverse probability treatment weighting. This is a retrospective, single-center analysis of 925 consecutive patients with aortic valve stenosis undergoing TF-TAVI (n = 802) or TA-TAVI (n = 123) at the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland, as a single procedure between September 2011 and August 2020. Baseline characteristics revealed a higher perioperative risk as reflected in the EuroSCORE II (geometric mean 2.3 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 2.4) vs. 3.7 (CI 3.1 to 4.5); before inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) p < 0.001) in the transfemoral than in the transapical group, respectively. After 30 days, TF-TAVI patients had a higher incidence of any bleeding than TA-TAVI patients (TF-TAVI n = 146 vs. TA-TAVI n = 15; weighted hazard ratio (HR) 0.52 (0.29 to 0.95); p = 0.032). After 5 years, all-cause mortality did not differ between the two groups (TF-TAVI n = 162 vs. TA-TAVI n = 45; weighted HR 1.31, (0.92 to 1.88); p = 0.138). With regard to our data, we could demonstrate, despite a higher perioperative risk, the short- and long-term safety and efficacy of the transapical approach for TAVI therapies. Though at higher perioperative risk, transapically treated patients suffered from less bleeding or vascular complications than transfemorally treated patients. It is of utmost interest that 5-year mortality did not differ between the groups.

Surgery after Failed Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Indications and Outcomes of a Concerning Condition

OBJECTIVES

The number of transcatheter aortic valve implantations (TAVI) has increased enormously in recent decades. Transcatheter valve prosthesis failure and the requirement of conventional surgical replacement are expected to attract more focus in the near future. Indeed, given the scarcity of research in this field, the next decade will likely represent the beginning of a period of meaningful exploration of the degenerative changes that occur with transcatheter valves. The current study represents-through a series of consecutive cases-one of the first analyses of the underlying causes of TAVI failure, i.e., degenerative, functional and infective, followed by surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and postoperative outcome.

METHODS

Between October 2008 and March 2021, 2098 TAVI procedures, including 1423 with transfemoral, 309 with transapical, and 366 with transaortic access, were performed in our institution. Among these, 0.5% (number(n) = 11) required acute SAVR (n = 6) within 7 days (n = 3) or later (n = 2), and were included in the study.

RESULTS

Valve stent dislocation was the most common cause of replacement (83%). Causes of replacement within 7 days after TAVI were multifactorial. In the later course, endocarditis was the sole indication for SAVR after TAVI. TAVI with transapical or transaortal approach had a higher EuroSCORE II (10.9 (7.2-35.3) vs. 3.5 (1.8-7.8)). Their 30-day mortality after surgical conversion was higher (67% vs. 20%), when compared to those who underwent a transfemoral procedure. The longest documented survival beyond 30 days was 58 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The causes of SAVR after TAVI failure are multifactorial, and include biological, physical and infectious factors. An acceptable midterm prognosis may be expected in patients with physical causes when dislocation of the catheter prosthesis is observed; in such cases, emergency conversion is required. Conversion due to infection, as in cases of endocarditis, had the worst outcome. Prognosis after conversion due to degeneration is still problematic, due to a lack of autopsies and the recent history of prosthetic implantations.

Transapical-transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve

BACKGROUND

Scarcely any data has been published on the mid-term effect of transapical-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI) using the Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve (S3; Edwards Lifesciences Corp., Irvine, CA, USA). We present mid-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after TA-TAVI utilizing S3.

METHODS

Between 02/2014-06/2017, 122 elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis underwent TA-TAVI utilizing S3 at our institution. We conducted clinical and echocardiographic follow-up. The mean follow-up was 15 months. All end-point-related outcomes were adjudicated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions.

RESULTS

The STS-score of the entire cohort was 6.26±4.6. More than one-third of the patients exhibited severe peripheral artery disease. The 30-d all-cause mortality, all-stroke rate, and myocardial infarction of the entire cohort were 4.1%, 1.6%, and 0.8% respectively. Median survival time of the entire cohort was 35 months. The cumulative mid-term myocardial infarction and stroke rate was 2.6% and 3.5%, respectively. The postoperative moderate/severe paravalvular leakage occurred in 1.6% of cases. At discharge, one-year and two-year postprocedure peak/mean gradients were 16.6±8.3/ 9±5.1 mmHg, 18±6.9/ 10±4.5 mmHg, and 22.2±5.4/ 12.8±4.6 mmHg, respectively. The rate of new pacemaker cases was 14.1%. Acute kidney injury network 2/3 appears, as an independent predictor of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed very promising early and mid-term clinical outcomes with a high degree of device success and good hemodynamic performance after TA-TAVI using the S3 in the intermediate risk patient profile.

Clinical Outcome and Safety of Transcaval Access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement as Compared to Other Alternative Approaches

Background: A small proportion of patients in need of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are not suitable for the transfemoral approach due to peripheral artery disease. Alternative TAVR approaches are associated with short- and long-term hazards. A novel technique of caval-aortic (transcaval) access for TAVR has been utilized as an alternative access technique.

Aim: To compare safety and efficacy of transcaval access as compared to other alternative access (axillary or apical) for TAVR.

Methods: A single-center, retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing alternative access for TAVR. Events were adjudicated according to VARC-2 criteria.

Results: A total of 185 patients were included in the present analysis. Mean age was 81 years with a small majority for male gender (54%). Of the entire cohort, 20 patients (12%) underwent transcaval TAVR, and 165 patients (82%) underwent TAVR using alternative access. Overall, baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. General anesthesia was not utilized in transcaval patients; however, it was routinely used in nearly all alternative access patients. TAVR device success was comparable between the two groups (95%). Acute kidney injury occurred significantly less frequently among transcaval patients as compared to alternative access patients (5 vs. 12%, p = 0.05). Hospital stay was shorter for transcaval patients (6.3 days vs. 14.4; p < 0.001). No difference in early or 30-day mortality (10 vs. 7.9%, p = 0.74) was noted between groups.

Conclusions: In patients who cannot undergo TAVR via the trans-femoral approach due to peripheral vascular disease, transcaval access is a safe approach as compared to other alternative access techniques, with lower risk of kidney injury and shorter hospital stay.

Left Ventricular Apex: A "Minimally Invasive Motorway" for Safe Cardiovascular Procedures

Since the advent of TAVR (transcatheter aortic valve replacement), the transapical surgical approach has been affirmed as a safe and effective alternative access for patients with unsuitable peripheral arteries. With the improvement of devices for transfemoral approach and the development of other alternative accesses, the number of transapical procedures has decreased significantly worldwide. The left ventricular apex, however, has proved to be a safe and valid alternative access for various other structural heart procedures such as mitral valve repair, mitral valve-in-valve or valve-in-ring replacement, transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR), transcatheter mitral paravalvular leak repair, and thoracic aorta endovascular repair (TEVAR). We review the literature and our experience of various hybrid transcatheter structural heart procedures using the transapical surgical approach and discuss pros and cons.

Dose approach matter? A meta-analysis of outcomes following transfemoral versus transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has gained increasing acceptance for patients with aortic disease. Both transfemoral (TF-TAVR) and transapical (TA-TAVR) approach were widely adopted while their performances are limited to a few studies with controversial results. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the mortality and morbidity of complications between TF- versus TA-TAVR based on the latest data.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched until April 2021. RCTs and observational studies comparing the outcomes between TF-TAVR versus TA-TAVR patients were included. Heterogeneity assumption was assessed by an I² test. The pooled odds ratios(OR) or mean differences with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to evaluate the difference for each end point using a fixed-effect model or random-effect model based on I² test.

Results

The meta-analysis included 1 RCT and 20 observational studies, enrolling 19,520 patients (TF-TAVR, n = 11,986 and TA-TAVR, n = 7,534). Compared with TA-TAVR, TF-TAVR patients showed significantly lower rate of postoperative in-hospital death (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.59–0.77, P < 0.001) and 1-year death (OR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.41–0.69, P < 0.001). Incidence of major bleeding and acute kidney injury were lower and length of hospital stay was shorter, whereas those of permanent pacemaker and major vascular complication were higher in TF-TAVR patients. There were no significant differences between TF-TAVR versus TA-TAVR for stroke and mid-term mortality.

Conclusions

There were fewer early deaths in patients with transfemoral approach, whereas the number of mid-term deaths and stroke was not significantly different between two approaches. TF-TAVR was associated with lower risk of bleeding, acute kidney injury as well as shorter in-hospital stay, but higher incidence of vascular complication and permanent pacemaker implantation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-021-02158-4.

Oversized versus Non-oversized Prosthesis: Midterm Outcomes after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using SAPIEN 3 Valve

BACKGROUND

 A certain degree of prosthesis oversizing is recommended for the SAPIEN 3 (S3; Edwards Lifesciences Corp., Irvine, California, United States) to ensure device success. We aimed to investigate midterm outcomes in patients who received oversized (OS) S3 valve after transapical-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TA-TAVR).

METHODS

 Out of 122 patients with aortic stenosis who underwent TA-TAVR using S3 at our institution, 42 received OS prosthesis. We used computed tomography (CT) derived effective diameter to assess oversizing. We defined oversizing if the labeled diameter of the selected valve for implantation was ≥2 mm bigger than the effective annulus diameter calculated by the annulus area. We conducted a midterm follow-up and compared the OS cohort with the non-OS (nOS) cohort.

RESULTS

 The study groups showed similar risk score and age (STS [Society of Thoracic Surgery] score: 5.4 ± 3; mean age: 80.7 ± 5.7). The 30-day mortality was 7.1% in OS versus 2.4% in nOS. The 30-day all-stroke was 2.4% in OS versus 0% in nOS. The 1- and 3-year all-cause mortality were 28.5 and 42.8% in OS versus 21.9 and 26.8% in nOS, respectively. Midterm freedom from death and from cardiocerebral events was similar in both groups. Moderate/severe paravalvular leakage occurred in 0% in OS versus 5.4% in nOS. The postdilation rate was 7.1% in OS versus 15.3% in nOS. The rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) was 15.7% in OS versus 9.3% in nOS. The STS score was detected as an independent predictor of mortality.

CONCLUSION

 Oversizing reduces the risk of device failure and intraprocedural postdilation but increases the risk of PPI. Early and midterm morbidity and mortality after OS and nOS with S3 are comparable.

Imaging of transcatheter aortic valve replacement complications

Aortic stenosis is increasing in incidence and is now commonly managed with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in intermediate and high-risk patients. Radiologists are likely to encounter patients undergoing this procedure both pre- and postoperatively, and therefore, an understanding of procedural complications is essential. Complications may relate to the access site or approach, or the valve itself. This article will review the most common complications described in literature and focuses on the role of multidetector computed tomography (CT) in their evaluation either exclusively, or complementary to other imaging methods.

Self-expanding apical closure device for full-percutaneous closed-chest transapical valve procedures with large-sized introducer sheaths: first study in an animal model

OBJECTIVES

Available apical occluders do not fulfil requirements for full-percutaneous transapical valve procedures with large-sized introducer sheaths. A self-expanding closure device designed for closed-chest transapical valve procedures was tested in an animal model to verify safety, efficacy and thrombogenicity.

METHODS

Large-sized 21-Fr introducer sheaths (Certitude™ system for Sapien™ valves) were percutaneously placed in the ventricles of nine 3-month old minipigs. To seal the apical access, delivery catheters carrying folded self-expanding plugs were inserted. Then, the plugs were deployed while sheaths were removed. Echocardiograms verified tamponade and cardiac function, drains were not placed and a 3-month long aspirin therapy was administered. After 6 and 9 months, animals were euthanized and organs were analysed for macroembolic lesions search. Histological analysis was also performed.

RESULTS

Nine minipigs (weight: 28±3 kg) were used for this study. Eight plugs were successfully deployed in 8 ventricles without cardiac tamponade or ventricular dysfunction (success rate: 88.9%). In a failed procedure (the animal died after 1 month of cardiac tamponade), the outer disc of the apical plug got stuck in the intercostal space and did not correctly deploy. Post-mortem analysis in 8 minipigs at 6 (n = 4) and 9 months (n = 4) confirmed full deployment and good fixation of all plugs with internal surfaces covered by new endocardium. Macroscopic analysis of myocardium and vital organs showed absence of embolic lesions. Histological analysis showed absence of significant inflammatory infiltration and thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this animal model, self-expanding closure devices sealed 21-Fr large percutaneous apical accesses without acute tamponade, thrombosis or embolization. Further tests to evaluate full-percutaneous closed-chest apical procedures are required.