1. Evolution of Alternative-access Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
- Author
-
Samir R. Kapadia, Eugene H. Blackstone, James Yun, Kevin Hodges, Bogdan A. Kindzelski, Tamer Attia, Ashley M. Lowry, Zoran B. Popović, Shinya Unai, Stephanie Mick, Shirin Siddiqi, Lars G. Svensson, and Amar Krishnaswamy
- Subjects
Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Transcatheter aortic ,business.industry ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Preoperative risk ,MEDLINE ,Surgery ,Text mining ,Valve replacement ,medicine ,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine ,business ,Transaxillary approach - Abstract
Background Transfemoral access is the most common approach for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, a subset of patients require alternative access. This study describes the evolution and outcomes of alternative-access TAVR at Cleveland Clinic. Methods From January 2006 to January 2019, 2446 patients underwent TAVR, 414 (17%) through alternative access (247 transapical, 95 transaortic, 56 transaxillary, 2 transcarotid, 10 transiliac, 4 transcaval). Patients undergoing alternative-access TAVR had high preoperative risk. Propensity-matched comparisons were targeted at comparing transfemoral versus transaxillary approaches since 2012. Results Over time, the favored alternative-access approach shifted from transapical and transaortic to transaxillary. Pacemaker requirement was similar for alternative-access and transfemoral approaches. Compared with transfemoral access, major vascular injuries were higher in the alternative-access group (12 [2.9%] vs 27 [1.3%], P = .02), but minor vascular injuries were lower (13 [3.1%] vs 198 [9.8%], P Conclusions The transaxillary approach has emerged as our preferred alternative-access strategy for TAVR. It is associated with superior operative outcomes compared with transthoracic approaches, and results are comparable with those of the transfemoral approach.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF