Intravascular Lithotripsy for Acute Stent Under-Expansion and In-Stent Restenosis: A Case Series.

Coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) has an incidence of about 10% of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) performed in the United States. Traditional management strategies for ISR include balloon angioplasty with non-compliant or use of cutting/scoring balloons or atheroablative therapies (like laser and rotational atherectomy), all of which are inherently limited in their ability to treat stent under-expansion or calcification around the stent. Shockwave intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) has recently demonstrated safe and efficacious treatment of severely calcified coronary stenoses with reported cases of treating ISR as an off-label use. In this case series, we describe the successful use of IVL for 6 cases of ISR and 1 case of stent under-expansion using 40-80 IVL pulses per lesion. Angiographic success was obtained in all seven patients, and there were no intra-procedural complications or adverse cardiac events at a mean follow-up of 200 days. Our report indicates that IVL can be safely and effectively used to treat ISR and stent under-expansion.

Comparison of Transfemoral versus Transsubclavian/Transaxillary access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Femoral access is the gold standard for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Safe alternative access, that represents about 15 % of TAVR cases, remains important for patients without adequate transfemoral access. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing transfemoral (TF) access versus transsubclavian or transaxillary (TSc/TAx) access in patients undergoing TAVR. We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL Register, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov (inception through May 24, 2022) for studies comparing (TF) to (TSc/TAx) access for TAVR. A total of 21 studies with 75,995 unique patients who underwent TAVR (73,203 transfemoral and 2,792 TSc/TAx) were included in the analysis. There was no difference in the risk of in-hospital and 30-day all-cause mortality between the two groups (RR 0.64, 95 % CI 0.36-1.13, P = 0.12) and (RR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.64-1.41, P = 0.81), while 1-year mortality was significantly lower in the TF TAVR group (RR 0.79, 95 % CI 0.67-0.93, P = 0.005). No significant differences in major bleeding (RR 0.82, 95 % CI 0.65-1.03, P = 0.09), major vascular complications (RR 1.14, 95 % CI 0.75-1.72, P = 0.53), and stroke (RR 0.66, 95 % CI 0.42-1.02, P = 0.06) were observed. In patients undergoing TAVR, TF access is associated with significantly lower 1-year mortality compared to TSc/TAx access without differences in major bleeding, major vascular complications and stroke. While TF is the preferred approach for TAVR, TSc/TAx is a safe alternative approach. Future studies should confirm these findings, preferably in a randomized setting.