Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
Clin Res Cardiol ; 2024 Mar 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38436739

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In patients not suitable for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), several access strategies can be chosen. AIM: To evaluate the use and patient outcomes of transaxillary (TAx), transapical (TA), and transaortic (TAo) as alternative access for TAVI in Germany; to further evaluate surgical cutdown vs. percutaneous TAx access. METHODS: All patients entered the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY) between 2011 and 2019 who underwent non-transfemoral TAVI were included in this analysis. Patients with TA, TAo, or TAx TAVI were compared using a weighted propensity score model. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis was performed for TAx regarding the percutaneous or surgical cutdown approach. RESULTS: Overall, 9686 patients received a non-transfemoral access. A total of 8918 patients (92.1%) underwent TA, 398 (4.1%) TAo, and 370 (3.8%) TAx approaches. Within the TAx subgroup, 141 patients (38.1%) received subclavian cutdown, while 200 (54.1%) underwent a percutaneous approach. The TA patients had a significantly lower 30-day survival than TAx patients (TA 90.92% vs. TAx 95.59%, p = 0.006; TAo 92.22% vs. TAx 95.59%, p = 0.102). Comparing percutaneous and cutdown TAx approaches, no significant differences were seen. However, more vascular complications occurred (TA 1.8%, TAo 2.4%, TAx 12.2%; p < .001), and the hospital length of stay was shorter (TA 12.9 days, TAo 14.1 days, TAx 12 days; p < .001) after TAx access. CONCLUSION: It may be reasonable to consider TAx access first in patients not suitable for TF-TAVI, because the 30-day survival was higher compared with TA access and the 1-year survival was higher compared with TAo access. It remains important for the heart teams to offer alternative access modalities for patients not amenable to the standard TF-TAVI approaches.

2.
J Clin Med ; 12(11)2023 Jun 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37298012

ABSTRACT

Background: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) has a high prevalence of obstructive coronary artery disease and total coronary occlusion. Consequently, these patients are frequently loaded with antiplatelets and anticoagulants before hospital arrival. However, OHCA patients have multiple non-cardiac causes and high susceptibility for bleeding. In brief, there is a gap in the evidence for loading in OHCA patients. Objective: The current analysis stratified the outcome of patients with OHCA according to pre-clinical loading. Material and Methods: In a retrospective analysis of an all-comer OHCA registry, patients were stratified by loading with aspirin (ASA) and unfractionated heparin (UFH). Bleeding rate, survival to hospital discharge and favorable neurological outcomes were measured. Results: Overall, 272 patients were included, of whom 142 were loaded. Acute coronary syndrome was diagnosed in 103 patients. One-third of STEMIs were not loaded. Conversely, 54% with OHCA from non-ischemic causes were pretreated. Loading was associated with increased survival to hospital discharge (56.3 vs. 40.3%, p = 0.008) and a more favorable neurological outcome (80.7 vs. 62.6% p = 0.003). Prevalence of bleeding was comparable (26.8 vs. 31.5%, p = 0.740). Conclusions: Pre-clinical loading did not increase bleeding rates and was associated with favorable survival. Overtreatment of OHCA with non-ischemic origin, but also undertreatment of STEMI-OHCA were documented. Loading without definite diagnosis of sustained ischemia is debatable in the absence of reliable randomized controlled data.

3.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 16(4): 396-411, 2023 02 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36858659

ABSTRACT

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 (Pinteraction = 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.


Subject(s)
Ischemic Attack, Transient , Peripheral Arterial Disease , Stroke , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Humans , Treatment Outcome , Registries
4.
J Endovasc Ther ; 30(5): 730-738, 2023 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35514295

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous femoral artery access is being increasingly used in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). The technique can be challenging in patients with previously surgically exposed or repaired femoral arteries because of excessive scar tissue. However, a successful percutaneous approach may cause less morbidity than a "re-do" open femoral approach. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of prior open surgical femoral exposure on technical success and clinical outcomes of percutaneous approach. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who underwent percutaneous EVAR between 2010 and 2020 at 2 major aortic centers. Patients were divided into 2 groups (with or without prior open surgical femoral access) for analysis of clinical outcomes. Only punctures with sheaths ≥12Fr were included for analysis. The access and (pre)closure techniques were similar in both institutions. Primary end points were intraoperative technical success, access-related revision, and access complications. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify determinants of conversion to open approach and femoral access complications in intact and re-do groins. RESULTS: A total of 632 patients underwent percutaneous (complex) EVAR: 98 had prior open surgical femoral access and 534 patients underwent de novo femoral percutaneous access. A total of 1099 femoral artery punctures were performed: 149 in re-do and 950 in intact groins. The extent of endovascular repair included 159 infrarenal, 82 thoracic, 368 fenestrated/branched, and 23 iliac branch devices. No significant differences were seen in technical success (re-do 93.3% vs intact 95.3%, p=0.311), access-related surgical revision (0.7% vs 0.6%, p=0.950), and access complications (2.7% vs 4.0%, p=0.443). For the whole group, significant predictors for access complications in multivariate analyses were main access site (odds ratio [OR] 2.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07%-5.35%; p=0.033) and increase of the procedure time per hour (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.34%-2.04%; p<0.001), while increase in sheath-vessel ratio had a protective effect (OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.127%-0.85%; p=0.021). Surgical conversion was predicted by main access site (OR 2.32; 95% CI 1.28%-4.19%; p=0.007) and calcification of 50% to 75% of the circumference of the access vessel (OR 3.29; 95% CI 1.38%-7.86%; p=0.005). CONCLUSION: Within our population prior open surgical femoral artery exposure or repair had no negative impact on the technical success and clinical outcomes of percutaneous (complex) endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.


Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation , Endovascular Procedures , Humans , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/surgery , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/complications , Femoral Artery/diagnostic imaging , Femoral Artery/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Risk Factors
5.
Eur Heart J ; 44(12): 1040-1054, 2023 03 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36300362

ABSTRACT

AIMS: This network meta-analysis aimed to assess the effect of early coronary angiography (CAG) compared with selective CAG (late and no CAG) for patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest without ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTE-OHCA). METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic literature search was performed using the EMBASE, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases without restrictions on publication date. The last search was performed on 15 July 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRS) comparing the effect of early CAG to selective CAG after NSTE-OHCA on survival and/or neurological outcomes were included. Meta-analyses were performed based on a DerSimonian-Laird random effects model. A total of 18 studies were identified by the literature search. After the exclusion of two studies due to high risk of bias, 16 studies (six RCTs, ten NRS) were included in the final analyses. Meta-analyses showed a statistically significant increase in survival after early CAG compared with selective CAG in the overall analysis [OR: 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI): (1.12-1.76), P < 0.01, I2 = 68%]. This effect was lost in the subgroup analysis of RCTs [OR: 0.89, 95% CI: (0.73-1.10), P = 0.29, I2 = 0%]. Random effects model network meta-analysis of NRS based on a Bayesian method showed statistically significant increased survival after late compared with early CAG [OR: 4.20, 95% CI: (1.22, 20.91)]. CONCLUSION: The previously reported superiority of early CAG after NSTE-OHCA is based on NRS at high risk of selection and survivorship bias. The meta-analysis of RCTs does not support routinely performing early CAG after NSTE-OHCA.


Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Humans , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Coronary Angiography/methods , Network Meta-Analysis , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/diagnostic imaging , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging
6.
J Vasc Surg ; 76(5): 1150-1159, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35709857

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Upper extremity access (UEA) for antegrade cannulation of aortic side branches is a relevant part of endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysms and can be achieved using several techniques, sites, and sides. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different UEA strategies in a multicenter registry of complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: In six aortic centers in the Netherlands, all endovascular aortic procedures from 2006 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who received UEA during complex EVAR were included. The primary outcome was a composite end point of any access complication, excluding minor hematomas. Secondary outcomes were access characteristics, access complications considered individually, access reinterventions, and incidence of ischemic cerebrovascular events. RESULTS: A total of 417 patients underwent 437 UEA for 303 fenestrated/branched EVARs and 114 chimney EVARs. Twenty patients had bilateral, 295 left-sided, and 102 right-sided UEA. A total of 413 approaches were performed surgically and 24 percutaneously. Distal brachial access (DBA) was used in 89 cases, medial brachial access (MBA) in 149, proximal brachial access (PBA) in 140, and axillary access (AA) in 59 cases. No significant differences regarding the composite end point of access complications were seen (DBA: 11.3% vs MBA: 6.7% vs PBA: 13.6% vs AA: 10.2%; P = .29). Postoperative neuropathy occurred most after PBA (DBA: 1.1% vs MBA: 1.3% vs PBA: 9.3% vs AA: 5.1%; P = .003). There were no differences in cerebrovascular complications between access sides (right: 5.9% vs left: 4.1% vs bilateral: 5%; P = .75). Significantly more overall access complications were seen after a percutaneous approach (29.2% vs 6.8%; P = .002). In multivariate analysis, the risk for access complications after an open approach was decreased by male sex (odds ratio [OR]: 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.10-0.72; P = .009), whereas an increase in age per year (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.004-1.179; P = .039) and diabetes mellitus type 2 (OR: 3.70; 95% CI: 1.20-11.41; P = .023) increased the risk. CONCLUSIONS: Between the four access localizations, there were no differences in overall access complications. Female sex, diabetes mellitus type 2, and aging increased the risk for access complications after a surgical approach. Furthermore, a percutaneous UEA resulted in higher complication rates than a surgical approach.


Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Humans , Male , Female , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Blood Vessel Prosthesis , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Risk Factors , Upper Extremity/blood supply , Aortic Aneurysm/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Aneurysm/surgery
8.
Clin Res Cardiol ; 111(8): 843-858, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35298700

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Periinterventional stroke is one of the most feared potential complication, among patients treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The purpose of this review was to investigate the incidence of cerebrovascular events and the influence of postinterventional neurologic check-up in patients undergoing TAVI. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to the PRISMA guideline. Three separate electronic searches of the public domains Medline and Clinicaltrials.gov were performed to identify the 30-day incidence of stroke within randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and registries for patients undergoing a TAVI procedure. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the 30-day incidence of stroke within RCTs. Furthermore, we pooled the RCTs in which a scheduled neurological check-up was conducted or not to investigate the effect of this intervention. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies including 399,491 TAVI patients were included, 6370 from RCTs, 833 from cerebral-embolic protection device RCTs and 392,288 were adopted from registries. The mean 30-day incidence of stroke among all reviewed studies was 2.33%. In RCTs evaluating TAVI the pooled stroke incidence was 3.86%, among RCTs focused CEP the incidence was 6.36% and in registries the incidence was 2.29%. Ten RCTs conducted scheduled neurological check-ups, the incidence in these was 4.03% and among the remaining RCTs it was 2.47%. In the meta-analysis, the pooled 30-day stroke incidence was 3.61% (95% CI 2.57-4.79%). CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates that the stroke incidences following TAVI differ strongly according to the study design and neurological follow-up. Intense neurological testing increases the incidence of a stroke after TAVI.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Stroke , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/complications , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Humans , Incidence , Registries , Risk Factors , Stroke/epidemiology , Stroke/etiology , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Treatment Outcome
9.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 9: 1104357, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36741852

ABSTRACT

Background: Incidence and mortality of cardiogenic shock (CS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain high despite substantial therapy improvements in acute percutaneous coronary intervention over the last decades. Unloading the left ventricle in patients with Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) can be performed by using an intra-aortic balloon pumps' (IABP) afterload reduction, which might be especially beneficial in AMI patients with CS. Objective: The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO treatment on the mortality of patients with CS due to AMI. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using EMBASE, COCHRANE, and MEDLINE databases. Studies comparing the effect of VA-ECMO + IABP vs. VA-ECMO on mortality of patients with AMI were included. Meta-analyses were performed to analyze the effect of the chosen treatment on 30-day/in-hospital mortality. Results: Twelve studies were identified by the literature search, including a total of 5,063 patients, 81.5% were male and the mean age was 65.9 years. One thousand one hundred and thirty-six patients received treatment with VA-ECMO in combination with IABP and 2,964 patients received VA-ECMO treatment only. The performed meta-analysis showed decreased mortality at 30-days/in-hospital after VA-ECMO + IABP compared to VA-ECMO only for patients with cardiogenic shock after AMI (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.30-0.44, P≤0.001). Combination of VA-ECMO + IABP was associated with higher rates of weaning success (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16-0.53, P < 0.001) without an increase of vascular access complications (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.35-2.08, P = 0.72). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, combination therapy of VA-ECMO + IABP was superior to VA-ECMO only therapy in patients with CS due to AMI. In the absence of randomized data, these results are hypothesis generating only.

10.
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol ; 43(2): 186-195, 2020 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31591688

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to review the risk of developing cerebrovascular complications from upper extremity access during endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysms. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to the PRISMA guideline. An electronic search of the public domains Medline (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), Web of Science and Cochrane Library was performed to identify studies related to the treatment of aortic aneurysms involving upper extremity access. Meta-analysis was used to compare the rate of cerebrovascular event after left, right and bilateral upper extremity access. Results are presented as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Thirteen studies including 1276 patients with complex endovascular treatment of aortic aneurysms using upper extremity access were included in the systematic review. Left upper extremity access (UEA) was used in 1028 procedures, right access in 148 and bilateral access in 100 procedures. The rate of cerebrovascular complications for patients treated through left UEA was 1.7%, through right UEA 4% and through bilateral UEA 5%. In the meta-analysis, we included seven studies involving 645 patients treated with a left upper extremity access, 87 patients through a right and 100 patients through a bilateral upper extremity access. Patients, who underwent right-sided (RR 5.01, 95% CI 1.51-16.58, P = 0.008) or bilateral UEA (RR 4.57, 95% CI 1.23-17.04, P = 0.02), had a significantly increased risk of cerebrovascular events compared to those who had a left-sided approach. CONCLUSION: Left upper extremity access is associated with a significantly lower rate of cerebrovascular complications as compared to right or bilateral upper extremity access.


Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm/surgery , Cerebrovascular Disorders/etiology , Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects , Endovascular Procedures/methods , Upper Extremity/blood supply , Aorta , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Female , Humans , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
11.
J Endovasc Ther ; 26(5): 727-731, 2019 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31288644

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of the suture-mediated ProGlide device in closure of the brachial artery after endovascular interventions. Materials and Methods: From 2016 to 2017, a pilot study was performed using the ProGlide to achieve hemostasis after percutaneous access of distal brachial arteries >4 mm in diameter. In an interim analysis, the results were compared to a matched control group taken from a 60-patient historical cohort who underwent brachial artery access and manual compression to achieve hemostasis between 2014 and 2017. The primary outcome was access-related reintervention and the secondary outcome was the incidence of access-site complications. Results: Seven patients (mean age 67.9 years; 6 men) were enrolled in the study before it was stopped in 2017. Four patients experienced 6 access-site complications (neuropathy, hematoma, occlusion, and pseudoaneurysm). These resulted in 3 access-related reinterventions: surgical evacuation of a hematoma, thrombectomy of the occluded brachial artery, and surgical repair of the pseudoaneurysm. In the interim comparison to the 19 matched patients (mean age 61.9 years; 6 men), the ProGlide group had proportionally more patients experiencing access-related complications (57% vs 16% for manual compression, p=0.035) and resultant reinterventions (43% vs 11%, p=0.064). Based on this data the trial was stopped. Conclusion: Considering this experience, it is not advisable to use the ProGlide in transbrachial endovascular interventions due to the high incidence of complications and access-related reinterventions.


Subject(s)
Brachial Artery , Catheterization, Peripheral , Endovascular Procedures , Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Hemostatic Techniques/instrumentation , Vascular Closure Devices , Aged , Catheterization, Peripheral/adverse effects , Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects , Equipment Design , Feasibility Studies , Female , Hemorrhage/etiology , Hemostatic Techniques/adverse effects , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Pilot Projects , Punctures , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
12.
J Endovasc Ther ; 25(5): 599-607, 2018 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30086665

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To present a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the transradial approach for aortoiliac and femoropopliteal interventions to the traditional transfemoral access. METHODS: A search of the public domain databases MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library Databases was performed to identify studies related to the use of the transradial approach for infra-aortic procedures. Meta-analysis was used to compare the transradial to the transfemoral route in terms of procedure success, complications, procedure parameters, and hospital length of stay. Results are presented as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Nineteen studies containing 638 patients with transradial access for lower limb interventions were selected. Lesions were treated from the aortic bifurcation down to the popliteal artery. The mean technical success rate was 90.9%, conversion to a transfemoral approach was necessary in 9.9%, and complications were reported in 1.9%. The meta-analysis included 4 comparative studies involving 114 transradial and 208 transfemoral procedures. There was no significant advantage of either approach in terms of procedure success (OR 5.0, 95% CI 0.49 to 50.83, p=0.17), but the risk of developing a complication was significantly lower (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.86, p=0.03) with the transradial approach. CONCLUSION: Transradial access for lower limb endovascular interventions can be performed with comparable technical success and a lower overall complication profile compared to transfemoral access.


Subject(s)
Aortic Diseases/therapy , Catheterization, Peripheral , Endovascular Procedures , Femoral Artery , Iliac Artery , Peripheral Arterial Disease/therapy , Popliteal Artery , Radial Artery , Catheterization, Peripheral/adverse effects , Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...