Vascular Complications in TAVR: Incidence, Clinical Impact, and Management

Comparison of ultrasound- versus fluoroscopy-guidEd femorAl access In tranS-catheter aortic valve replacement In the Era of contempoRary devices: The EASIER registry

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications (VCs) still represent one of the principal concerns of trans-femoral trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR). New-generation devices can minimize such complications but the arterial access management is left to the operator's choice. This study aims to describe the rate of VCs in a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices and to determine whether an ultrasound-guided (USG) vs. a fluoroscopy-guided (FG) femoral access management has an impact on their prevention.

METHODS

This is a prospective, observational, multicenter study. Consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices were analyzed from January 2022 to October 2022 in five tertiary care centers. Femoral accesses were managed according to the operator's preferences. All the patients underwent a pre-discharge peripheral ultrasound control. VCs and bleedings were the main endpoints of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 458 consecutive patients were enrolled (274 in the USG group and 184 in the FG group). VCs occurred in 6.5 % of the patients (5.2 % minor and 1.3 % major). There was no difference between the USG and the FG groups in terms of any VCs (7.3 % vs. 5.4 %; p = 0.4), or any VARC-3 bleedings (6.9 % vs 6 %, p = 0.9). At logistic regression analysis, the two guidance strategies did not result as predictors of VCs (odds Ratio 0.8, 95 % Confidence Interval 0.46-1.4; P = 0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices, the occurrence of VCs is low and mostly represented by minor VCs. USG and FG modalities did not affect the rate of VCs.

Efficacy and outcomes of antiplatelet therapy versus oral anticoagulants in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Recent guidelines suggest that antiplatelet therapy (APT) is the standard of care in the absence of long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) indications in patients post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The superiority of one method over the other remains controversial.

Materials and methods

Several databases, including MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and EMBASE, were electronically searched. The primary endpoint was the all-cause mortality (ACM) rate. Secondary endpoints included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke/TIA, haemorrhagic stroke, bleeding events, systemic embolism, and valve thrombosis in post-TAVR patients receiving APT and oral anticoagulants (OACs). Forest plots were generated using Review Manager version 5.4, with a p value less than 0.05 indicating statistical significance. Subgroup analysis was performed to explore potential sources of heterogeneity.

Results

Twelve studies were selected. No significant differences were observed in APT and OAC group for ACM [risk ratio (RR): 0.67; 95% CI:0.45-1.01; P=0.05], cardiovascular death [RR:0.91; 95% CI:0.73-1.14; P=0.42], MI [RR:1.69; 95% CI:0.43-6.72; P=0.46], Stroke/TIA [RR:0.79; 95% CI:0.58-1.06; P=0.12], ischaemic stroke [RR:0.83; 95% CI:0.50-1.37; P=0.47], haemorrhagic stroke [RR:1.08; 95% CI: 0.23-5.15; P=0.92], major bleeding [RR:0.79; 95% CI:0.51-1.21; P=0.28], minor bleeding [RR:1.09; 95% CI: 0.80-1.47; P=0.58], life-threatening bleeding [RR:0.85; 95% CI:0.55-1.30; P=0.45], any bleeding [RR:0.98; 95% CI:0.83-1.15; P=0.78], and systemic embolism [RR:0.87; 95% CI:0.44-1.70; P=0.68]. The risk of valve thrombosis was higher in patients receiving APT than in those receiving OAC [RR:2.61; 95% CI:1.56-4.36; P =0.0002].

Conclusions

Although the risk of valve thrombosis increased in patients receiving APT, the risk of other endpoints was comparable between the two groups.

Short-Term Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in a Developing Country

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis in all surgical risk groups. Reports of clinical outcomes post-TAVR in developing countries are scarce. We aimed to address the clinical outcomes and safety profile of TAVR in a developing country.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, retrospective study on patients undergoing TAVR at the American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC) from January 2016 to April 2023. We included a total of 399 patients. Our primary endpoint was to assess the rate of TAVR in-hospital and 30-day mortality, neurologic events, and new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) in patients, stratified by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk of mortality score.

RESULTS

Survival rates were 98.7% (394) at discharge vs. 97.5% (389) at 30 days post-procedure. The technical success rate was 95% (379) at the end of the procedure. Device success and early safety rates were 93.5% (373) and 83% (331), respectively at 30 days post-procedure. The all-cause mortality rate increased from 1.3% (5) at discharge to 2.5% (10) at 30-day intervals. The rate of ischemic stroke was 1.3% (five) at discharge and increased to 2% (eight) at 30 days post-procedure. PPI was needed in 5.8% (23) of patients at discharge with an increase to 7% (28) at one-month interval. Overall, the rates of TAVR outcomes among the three risk groups were comparable including neurologic events, valve-related complications, bleeding problems, vascular and access-related complications, and myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSION

This study at AUBMC highlights the successful implementation of the TAVR program in a developing country, showcasing its efficacy and safety within 30 days post-operation, despite challenges such as financial constraints and limited access to specialized training. Larger cohorts and longer follow-up periods are needed to accurately represent clinical outcomes in developing countries.

A Novel Use of a Not So "EZ-Blocker" For Lung Isolation During a Direct Transaortic Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Alternate access transcatheter aortic valve replacement presents unique challenges for anesthesiologists, including the possible need for lung isolation while working with space constraints around the patient's airway. Troubleshooting lung isolation in these cases can be challenging, requiring quick thinking and adaptability while maintaining patient safety. We present a case of direct transaortic transcatheter aortic valve replacement with an endobronchial blocker ("EZ-blocker") used for lung isolation that required a novel use of the "EZ-blocker" to achieve adequate lung isolation.

See It Best: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of Ultrasound-Guided versus Blind Femoral Artery Puncture in Balloon-Expandable TAVI

Background: Currently, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the standard procedure recommended for patients over 75 years of age with symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. Percutaneous transfemoral (TF) access is the main route used to perform the procedure. Among periprocedural complications, access-related ones are the most frequent, potentially leading to prolonged in-hospital stays and transfusions. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on consecutive patients undergoing TF-TAVI with the latest generation balloon-expandable transcatheter valve between 2013 and 2022. Results: A total of 600 patients were analyzed, differentiating the population between ultrasound-guided and blind common femoral artery puncture. Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 (VARC-3)criteria were used to report at 30 days and follow-up. In our propensity-matched comparison of the two groups, we found a strong reduction in access-related complications in the echo-guided group, particularly in terms of reduction of major and minor bleedings. We also found a significant trend in reduction of local complications, such as pseudoaneurysms, hematomas, arterio-venous fistulas, dissection of the femoral or iliac arteries, and stenosis. Conclusions: Although there is a lack of consensus on the role of ultrasound-guided puncture, we found better outcomes for patients having an echo-guided puncture of the main access, particularly with regard to access-related complications, early mobilization, and early discharge home.

Inpatient outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement based on class of obesity

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a transformative option for severe aortic stenosis, especially in elderly patients. obesity's impact on TAVR outcomes is limited. Using the National Inpatient Sample from 2016 to 2020, We analyzed 217,300 TAVR hospitalizations across BMI groups. No difference in in-hospital mortality was observed, class III obesity experienced longer hospital stays (adjusted β: 0.43 days, P < 0.05), higher costs (adjusted β: $3,126, P < 0.05), increased heart failure exacerbation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.03-7.01], p < 0.05), vascular access complications (aOR: 1.29, 95% CI: [1.07-1.52], P < 0.05), and post-operative pulmonary complications (Pneumonia (aOR: 1.42, 95% CI: [1.16-1.74], p < 0.05), acute hypoxic respiratory failure (aOR: 1.99, 95% CI: [1.67-2.36], p < 0.05), and non-invasive ventilation (aOR: 1.62, 95% CI: [1.07-2.44], p < 0.05). Complete heart block and permanent pacemaker requirement were higher in both class II and class III ((aOR: 1.30, 95% CI: [1.11-1.51], P < 0.05), (aOR:1.25, 95% CI: [1.06-1.46], P < 0.05) and ((aOR: 1.18, 95% CI: [1.00-1.40], P < 0.05), (aOR:1.22, 95% CI: [1.02-1.45], P < 0.05)) respectively. Understanding these links is crucial for optimizing TAVR care in obesity, ensuring enhanced outcomes, and procedural safety.

Femoral vessel complications after transfemoral TAVR-A contemporary sonography-based assessment of 480 patients with third-generation transcatheter valves

BACKGROUND

Postinterventional sonographic assessment of the femoral artery after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) has the potential to identify several pathologies. We investigated the incidence and risk factors of femoral vessel complications in a modern TAVR collective using postinterventional sonography.

METHODS

Between September 2017 and March 2022, 480 patients underwent TF-TAVR with postinterventional femoral sonography at a single center. Clinical outcomes and adverse events were analyzed after the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 (VARC-3) criteria.

RESULTS

In this cohort (51.2% male; age 80 ± 7.5 years, median EuroSCORE II 3.7) 74.8% (n = 359) were implanted with a self-expandable and 25.2% (n = 121) with a balloon-expandable valve. The main access (valve-delivery) was located right in 91.4% (n = 438), and the primary closure system was Proglide in 95% (n = 456). Vascular complications (VC) were observed in 29.16% (n = 140) of patients; 23.3% (n = 112) presented with minor- and 5.8% (n = 28) with major VC. Postinterventional femoral artery stenosis on the main access was observed in 9.8% (n = 47). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed female sex (p = .03, odds ratio [OR] 2.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-4.89) and the number of used endovascular closure devices (p = .014, OR 0.11, 95%CI 0.02-0.64) as predictive factors for femoral artery stenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of postinterventional femoral artery stenosis following TF-TAVR was higher than expected with a number of used closure devices and female sex being independent risk factors. Considering the continuous advance of TAVR in low-risk patients with preserved physical activity, emphasis should be directed at the correct diagnosis and follow-up of these complications.

Computed tomography derived anatomical predictors of vascular access complications following transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications after percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are associated with adverse clinical outcomes and remain a significant challenge.

AIMS

The purpose of this review is to synthesize the existing evidence regarding the iliofemoral artery features predictive of vascular complications after TAVI on pre-procedural contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography (MDCT).

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in Embase and Medline (Pubmed) databases. Studies of patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI with MDCT were included. Studies with only valve-in-valve TAVI, planned surgical intervention and those using fluoroscopic assessment were excluded. Data on study cohort, procedural characteristics and significant predictors of vascular complications were extracted.

RESULTS

We identified 23 original studies involving 8697 patients who underwent TAVI between 2006 and 2020. Of all patients, 8514 (97.9%) underwent percutaneous transfemoral-TAVI, of which 8068 (94.8%) had contrast-enhanced MDCT. The incidence of major vascular complications was 6.7 ± 4.1% and minor vascular complications 26.1 ± 7.8%. Significant independent predictors of major and minor complications related to vessel dimensions were common femoral artery depth (>54 mm), sheath-to-iliofemoral artery diameter ratio (>0.91-1.19), sheath-to-femoral artery diameter ratio (>1.03-1.45) and sheath-to-femoral artery area ratio (>1.35). Substantial iliofemoral vessel tortuosity predicted 2-5-fold higher vascular risk. Significant iliofemoral calcification predicted 2-5-fold higher risk. The iliac morphology score was the only hybrid scoring system with predictive value.

CONCLUSIONS

Independent iliofemoral predictors of access-site complications in TAVI were related to vessel size, depth, calcification and tortuosity. These should be considered when planning transfemoral TAVI and in the design of future risk prediction models.

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.

Long-Term Survival Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Real-World Experience of a Large Tertiary Center

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) becomes the leading therapeutic choice for severe aortic stenosis. There is a growing body of knowledge on long-term survival outcomes, but available data from real-world observational studies are scarce. An observational cohort study was conducted on 705 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR at Strasbourg University Hospital between February 2010 and June 2017. We observed the living status (dead or alive) for each study participants by March 2023. The primary end point was to evaluate the all-cause mortality rate beyond 5 years after TAVR, compare the survival outcomes according to valve type, and identify predictors of mortality. Of the 705 study participants, 91.8% of the TAVR procedures were performed through the common femoral artery and 60.6% were treated with a balloon-expandable valve. Over a mean study period of 5.4 ± 3 years, the all-cause mortality rate was 45.8%. No difference in survival outcomes according to valve type was observed (p = 0.449). All-cause mortality rate was associated with age ≥90 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1.625, 1.109 to 2.380, p = 0.013), female gender (HR 0.228, 0.176 to 0.294, p <0.001), diabetes mellitus (HR 1.356, 1.070 to 1.719, p = 0.012), post-TAVR stroke (HR = 2.867, 1.690 to 4.865, p <0.001), and post-TAVR acute kidney injury (HR 1.977, 1.445 to 2.703, p <0.001). In conclusion, the present real-world large tertiary center experience showed that more than half of patients who underwent TAVR are alive beyond 5 years from procedure's date. All-cause mortality is mainly determined by advanced age and co-morbid conditions, and valve type has no advantage on the survival outcomes.

Single femoral artery access is safe and feasible during transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a propensity score matched analysis

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) potentially may be significantly simplified by using the single artery access (SA) technique, which does not require a secondary artery access. Nevertheless, the safety and efficacy of this technique remains unclear. Our goal was to determine if single artery access TAVR (without upgrading the sheath size) is a feasible, minimally invasive procedure.

Methods

Patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR via the femoral artery were consecutively enrolled in this study. Eligible individuals were divided into 2 groups: the SA group and the dual artery access (DA) group. The primary end point was device success (defined by the valve academic research consortium 3, VARC 3). A 6-month follow-up and propensity score matching analyses were performed.

Results

After propensity score matching analysis, a total of 130 patients were included: 65 in the SA group and 65 in the DA group. The SA procedure achieved similar device success (95.4% vs. 87.7%; P = 0.115) compared with the DA procedure. The SA procedure shortened the operating time (102 min vs. 125 min; P = 0.001) but did not increase the x-ray time or dose. Both a 20 Fr and a 22 Fr sheath (without upgrading the sheath size) could be used for the SA procedure. There was no major vascular complication occurred in both groups. The incidence of minor main vascular and access complications in the SA group was comparable to those of the DA procedure (0.0% vs. 3.1%; P = 0.156).

Conclusions

The SA access procedure is a promising minimally invasive TAVR technique with a low incidence of vascular complications and a high incidence of device success. It is safe and possibly applicable in all TAVR procedures.

Vascular Complications in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Plug-Based vs Suture-Based Closure Devices

BACKGROUND

There are conflicting data regarding the efficacy and safety of suture vs plug-based vascular closure devices (VCDs) for large-bore catheter management in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We compared the rates of vascular complications (VCs) associated with 2 commonly used VCDs in a large cohort of patients undergoing TAVR.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre, all-comer, prospective registry study, enrolling patients undergoing TAVR for symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) between the years 2009 and 2022. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients undergoing closure of the femoral access point using the MANTA VCD (M-VCD) (Teleflex, Wayne, PA) vs the ProGlide VCD (P-VCD) (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, IL). The main outcome measures were researcher adjudicated events of VARC-2 defined major and minor VCs.

RESULTS

Overall, 2368 patients were enrolled in the registry; 1315 (51.0% male, 81.0 ± 7.0 years) patients were included in the current analysis. P-VCD was used in 813 patients, whereas M-VCD was used in 502 patients. In-hospital VCs were more frequent in the M-VCD vs the P-VCD group (17.3% vs 9.8%; P < 0.001). This outcome was mainly driven by elevated rates of minor VCs in the M-VCD group, whereas no significant difference was observed for major VCs (15.1% vs 8.4%; P < 0.001 and 2.2% vs 1.5%; P = 0.33, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing TAVR for severe AS, M-VCD was associated with higher rates of VCs. This outcome was mainly driven by minor VCs. The rate of major VCs was low in both groups.

Surgical Versus Interventional Treatment of Major Access Site Complications During Transfemoral TAVI Procedures at a Large Volume Center

PURPOSE

Access-related vascular complications in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) can be treated endovascularly or surgically. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of endovascular treatment compared with surgical repair for access-related vascular complications.

METHODS

This retrospective study was performed from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020. All transfemorally treated TAVI patients in whom a surgical or endovascular treatment for an access site complication was needed were included. The primary outcome was the need for any related vascular re-operation.

RESULTS

In total, 1219 transfemoral TAVI procedures were conducted during the study period. 19 patients suffered an access complication requiring endovascular treatment, while 54 patients required surgical repair. No differences were seen with regard to re-operations (endovascular 15.8% vs surgical 14.8%; p=0.919), wound infections (endovascular 0% vs surgical. 11.1%; p=0.129), and wound healing disorders (endovascular 15.8% vs surgical 29.6%; p=0.237). Patients undergoing endovascular treatment were discharged earlier (endovascular 11.2 vs surgical 14.9 days; p=0.028). After surgical repair, patients received significantly more blood transfusions than endovascularly treated patients (endovascular 1.00 vs surgical 3.1 red blood cell concentrate bags; p<0.001). No differences were found regarding the new onset of walking pain, rest pain, and ischemic ulcers during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective cohort, endovascular treatment of access-related vascular complications of transfemoral TAVI procedures was safe and feasible. During the hospital stay, endovascularly treated patients received fewer blood transfusions and were discharged faster than surgically treated patients. No differences regarding clinical outcomes and re-intervention rates were seen during the follow-up.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Given the in this retrospective study demonstrated safety and feasibility of endovascular treatment for major access-related vascular complications, along with the in-hospital benefits and absence of follow-up disadvantages compared to surgical treatment, endovascular treatment should be considered in cases of major access-related vascular complications in transfemoral TAVI patients.

Comparisons of different new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation devices for patients with severe aortic stenosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether there are differences among the new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices for patients with aortic stenosis remains unclear. The aim of the study was to compare the efficiency and safety of different new-generation TAVI devices for patients with aortic stenosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from their inception to 1 February 2022. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies that compared two or more different TAVI devices were enroled. Pairwise meta-analysis and frequentist network meta-analysis were conducted to pool the outcome estimates of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 79 studies were finally included. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking, the top two ranked valves for lower rates of events were as follows: direct flow medical (DFM) (4.6%) and Lotus (48.8%) for lower rate of device success; Sapien 3 (16.8%) and DFM (19.7%) for lower mortality; DFM (8.6%) and Sapien 3 (25.5%) for lower rates of stroke; Evolut (27.6%) and DFM (35.8%) for lower rates of major and life-threatening bleeding; Portico (22.6%) and Sapien 3 (41.9%) for lower rates of acute kidney injury; Acurate (8.6%) and DFM (13.2%) for lower rates of permanent pacemaker implantation; Lotus (0.3%) and Sapien 3 (22.7%) for lower rates of paravalvular leak; Evolut (1.4%) and Portico (29.1%) for lower rates of mean aortic valve gradients.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the present study suggested that the device success rates were comparable among these new-generation valves except for DFM. After excluding DFM, Sapien 3 might be the best effective for decreased mortality and stroke; Lotus might be the best effective for decreased paravalvular leak; Evolut might be the best effective for decreased major and life-threatening bleeding and mean aortic valve gradients; Acurate and Portico might be the best effective for decreased permanent pacemaker implantation and acute kidney injury, respectively.

Predicting the risk of iliofemoral vascular complication in complex transfemoral-TAVR using new generation transcatheter devices

Objective

Design a predictive risk model for minimizing iliofemoral vascular complications (IVC) in a contemporary era of transfemoral-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR).

Background

IVC remains a common complication of TF-TAVR despite the technological improvement in the new-generation transcatheter systems (NGTS) and enclosed poor outcomes and quality of life. Currently, there is no accepted tool to assess the IVC risk for calcified and tortuous vessels.

Methods

We reconstructed CT images of 516 propensity-matched TF-TAVR patients using the NGTS to design a predictive anatomical model for IVC and validated it on a new cohort of 609 patients. Age, sex, peripheral artery disease, valve size, and type were used to balance the matched cohort.

Results

IVC occurred in 214 (7.2%) patients. Sheath size (p = 0.02), the sum of angles (SOA) (p < .0001), number of curves (NOC) (p < .0001), minimal lumen diameter (MLD) (p < .001), and sheath-to-femoral artery diameter ratio (SFAR) (p = 0.012) were significant predictors for IVC. An indexed risk score (CSI) consisting of multiplying the SOA and NOC divided by the MLD showed 84.3% sensitivity and 96.8% specificity, when set to >100, in predicting IVC (C-stat 0.936, 95% CI 0.911-0.959, p < 0.001). Adding SFAR > 1.00 in a tree model increased the overall accuracy to 97.7%. In the validation cohort, the model predicted 89.5% of the IVC cases with an overall 89.5% sensitivity, 98.9% specificity, and 94.2% accuracy (C-stat 0.842, 95% CI 0.904-0.980, p < .0001).

Conclusion

Our CT-based validated-model is the most accurate and easy-to-use tool assessing IVC risk and should be used for calcified and tortuous vessels in preprocedural planning.

Comparison of Outcomes Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Requiring Peripheral Vascular Intervention or Alternative Access

Background Peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) is occasionally required to facilitate delivery system insertion or to treat vascular complications during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR). However, the impact of PVI on outcomes is not well understood. Therefore, we aimed to compare outcomes between TF-TAVR with versus without PVI and between TF-TAVR with PVI versus non-TF-TAVR. Methods and Results We retrospectively reviewed 2386 patients who underwent TAVR with a balloon-expandable valve at a single institution from 2016 to 2020. The primary outcomes were death and major adverse cardiac/cerebrovascular event (MACCE), defined as death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Of 2246 TF-TAVR recipients, 136 (6.1%) required PVI (89% bailout treatment). During follow-up (median 23.0 months), there were no significant differences between TF-TAVR with and without PVI in death (15.4% versus 20.7%; adjusted HR [aHR], 0.96 [95% CI, 0.58-1.58]) or MACCE (16.9% versus 23.0%; aHR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.52-1.36]). However, compared with non-TF-TAVR (n=140), TF-TAVR with PVI carried significantly lower rates of death (15.4% versus 40.7%; aHR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.24-0.75]) and MACCE (16.9% versus 45.0%; aHR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.23-0.68]). Landmark analyses demonstrated lower outcome rates following TF-TAVR with PVI than non-TF-TAVR both within 60 days (death 0.7% versus 5.7%, P=0.019; MACCE 0.7% versus 9.3%; P=0.001) and thereafter (death 15.0% versus 38.9%, P=0.014; MACCE 16.5% versus 41.3%, P=0.013). Conclusions The need for PVI during TF-TAVR is not uncommon, mainly due to the bailout treatment for vascular complications. PVI is not associated with worse outcomes in TF-TAVR recipients. Even when PVI is required, TF-TAVR is associated with better short- and intermediate-term outcomes than non-TF-TAVR.

Impact of TAVR on coronary artery hemodynamics using clinical measurements and image-based patient-specific in silico modeling

In recent years, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the leading method for treating aortic stenosis. While the procedure has improved dramatically in the past decade, there are still uncertainties about the impact of TAVR on coronary blood flow. Recent research has indicated that negative coronary events after TAVR may be partially driven by impaired coronary blood flow dynamics. Furthermore, the current technologies to rapidly obtain non-invasive coronary blood flow data are relatively limited. Herein, we present a lumped parameter computational model to simulate coronary blood flow in the main arteries as well as a series of cardiovascular hemodynamic metrics. The model was designed to only use a few inputs parameters from echocardiography, computed tomography and a sphygmomanometer. The novel computational model was then validated and applied to 19 patients undergoing TAVR to examine the impact of the procedure on coronary blood flow in the left anterior descending (LAD) artery, left circumflex (LCX) artery and right coronary artery (RCA) and various global hemodynamics metrics. Based on our findings, the changes in coronary blood flow after TAVR varied and were subject specific (37% had increased flow in all three coronary arteries, 32% had decreased flow in all coronary arteries, and 31% had both increased and decreased flow in different coronary arteries). Additionally, valvular pressure gradient, left ventricle (LV) workload and maximum LV pressure decreased by 61.5%, 4.5% and 13.0% respectively, while mean arterial pressure and cardiac output increased by 6.9% and 9.9% after TAVR. By applying this proof-of-concept computational model, a series of hemodynamic metrics were generated non-invasively which can help to better understand the individual relationships between TAVR and mean and peak coronary flow rates. In the future, tools such as these may play a vital role by providing clinicians with rapid insight into various cardiac and coronary metrics, rendering the planning for TAVR and other cardiovascular procedures more personalized.

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.

Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Comparing Medtronic's Evolut PRO and Evolut R: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become a broadly acceptable alternative to AV surgery in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). New valve designs are becoming available to address the shortcomings of their predecessors and improve clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to compare Medtronic's Evolut PRO, a new valve, with the previous Evolut R design. Procedural, functional and clinical endpoints according to the VARC-2 criteria were assessed.

RESULTS

Eleven observational studies involving N = 12,363 patients were included. Evolut PRO patients differed regarding age (p < 0.001), sex (p < 0.001) and STS-PROM estimated risk. There was no difference between the two devices in terms of TAVI-related early complications and clinical endpoints. A 35% reduction of the risk of moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak (PVL) favoring the Evolut PRO was observed (RR 0.66, 95%CI, [0.52, 0.86] p = 0.002; I2 = 0%). Similarly, Evolut PRO-treated patients demonstrated a reduction of over 35% in the risk of serious bleeding as compared with the Evolut R (RR 0.63, 95%CI, [0.41, 0.96]; p = 0.03; I2 = 39%), without differences in major vascular complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence shows good short-term outcomes of both the Evolut PRO and Evolut R prostheses, with no differences in clinical and procedural endpoints. The Evolut PRO was associated with a lower rate of moderate-to-severe PVL and major bleeding.

Evolving concepts in the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Thromboembolic and bleeding complications negatively impact recovery and survival after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Particularly, there is a considerable risk of ischaemic stroke and vascular access related bleeding, as well as spontaneous gastro-intestinal bleeding. Therefore, benefit and harm of antithrombotic therapy should be carefully balanced. This review summarizes current evidence on peri- and post-procedural antithrombotic treatment. Indeed, in recent years, the management of antithrombotic therapy after TAVI has evolved from intensive, expert opinion-based strategies, towards a deescalated, evidence-based approach. Besides per procedural administration of unfractionated heparin, this encompasses single antiplatelet therapy in patients without a concomitant indication for oral anticoagulation (OAC); and OAC monotherapy in patients with such indication, mainly being atrial fibrillation. Combination therapy should generally be avoided to reduce bleeding risk, except after recent coronary stenting where a period of dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin plus P2Y12-inhibitor) or P2Y12-inhibitor plus OAC (in patients with an independent indication for OAC) is recommended to prevent stent thrombosis. This new paradigm in which reduced antithrombotic intensity leads to improved patient safety, without a loss of efficacy, may be particularly suitable for elderly and fragile patients. Whether this holds in upcoming populations of younger and lower-risk patients and in specific populations as patients with subclinical valve thrombosis, is yet to be proven. Finally, whether less intensive or alternative approaches should be also applied for the periprocedural management of the antithrombotic therapy, has to be determined by ongoing and future studies.

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

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

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

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

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

Strategies for Facilitating Totally Percutaneous Transfemoral TAVR Procedures

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has transformed the treatment of aortic stenosis and should ideally be performed as a totally percutaneous procedure via the transfemoral (TF) approach. Peripheral vascular disease may impede valve delivery, and vascular access site complications are associated with adverse clinical outcome and increased mortality. We review strategies aimed to facilitate TF valve delivery in patients with hostile vascular anatomy and achieve percutaneous management of vascular complications.