ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Femoral access is the gold standard for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Guidelines recommend reconsidering surgery when this access is not feasible. However, alternative peripheral accesses exist, although they have not been accurately compared with femoral access. OBJECTIVES: This study compared nonfemoral peripheral (n-FP) TAVR with femoral TAVR. METHODS: Using the data from the national prospective French registry (FRANCE TAVI [French Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation]), this study compared the characteristics and outcomes of TAVR procedures according to whether they were performed through a femoral or a n-FP access, using a pre-specified propensity score-based matching between groups. Subanalysis during 2 study periods (2013 to 2015 and 2016 to 2017) and among low/intermediate-low and intermediate-high/high volume centers were performed. RESULTS: Among 21,611 patients, 19,995 (92.5%) underwent femoral TAVR and 1,616 (7.5%) underwent n-FP TAVR (transcarotid, n = 914 or trans-subclavian, n = 702). Patients in the n-FP access group had more severe disease (mean logistic EuroSCORE 19.95 vs. 16.95; p < 0.001), with a higher rate of peripheral vascular disease, known coronary artery disease, chronic pulmonary disease, and renal failure. After matching, there was no difference in the rate of post-procedural death and complications according to access site, except for a 2-fold lower rate of major vascular complications (odds ratio: 0.45; 95% confidence interval: 0.21 to 0.93; p = 0.032) and unplanned vascular repairs (odds ratio: 0.41; 95% confidence interval: 0.29 to 0.59; p < 0.001) in those who underwent n-FP access. The comparison of outcomes provided similar results during the second study period and in intermediate-high/high volume centers. CONCLUSIONS: n-FP TAVR is associated with similar outcomes compared with femoral peripheral TAVR, except for a 2-fold lower rate of major vascular complications and unplanned vascular repairs. n-FP TAVR may be favored over surgery in patients who are deemed ineligible for femoral TAVR and may be a safe alternative when femoral access risk is considered too high.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Aortic Valve/surgery , Catheterization, Peripheral/methods , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Propensity Score , Registries , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Femoral Artery , Follow-Up Studies , France/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Male , Prospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Survival Rate/trends , Time FactorsABSTRACT
For the CryoLife-O'Brien valve (CryoLife Inc, Kennesaw, GA, USA), implanted with a single suture line, we aimed to analyze the surgical requests and the hemodynamic results compared to stented bioprostheses. Two groups of patients requiring isolated aortic valve replacement from this population were compared retrospectively: 84 patients receiving the stentless CryoLife-O'Brien valve (Group A) and 94 patients receiving stented bioprostheses (Group B). Preoperative characteristics of patients were statistically equivalent for both groups. Statistically significant differences were observed only for operative durations and post-operative transprosthetic gradients: Aorta cross-clamp and cardio-pulmonary bypass durations were statistically longer for Group A than for Group B (45.9+/-5.7 min vs. 41.1+/-6.8 min; P<0.0001; and 64.3+/-11.6 min vs. 59.3+/-11.9 min, respectively; P=0.0053); maximal gradients and mean gradients were 19.9+/-10.9 mmHg vs. 25.6+/-10.4 mmHg (P=0.0008) and 10.8+/-5.3 mmHg vs. 14.8+/-6.4 mmHg (P<0.0001). Few surgical constraints and early post-operative hemodynamic efficiency of the stentless CryoLife-O'Brien valve means that this bioprosthesis can be intented in current practice for the aortic valve replacement in elderly patients.
