Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Transapical approach versus transcervical approach for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a retrospective monocentric study


Lu, Henri; Fournier, Stephane; Namasivayam, Jegaruban; Roguelov, Christian; Ferrari, Enrico; Eeckhout, Eric; Monney, Pierre; Tozzi, Piergiorgio; Marcucci, Carlo; Muller, Olivier; Kirsch, Matthias (2020). Transapical approach versus transcervical approach for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a retrospective monocentric study. Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, 31(6):781-788.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Transfemoral approach is the standard access-route for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, alternative approaches are needed in a number of patients and accesses such as transapical (TA) TAVR or transcervical (TC) are used. We aimed to compare clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after TA-TAVR or TC-TAVR.

METHODS

All patients who underwent TA- and TC-TAVR for severe aortic stenosis in our institution between 2008 and 2020 were retrospectively included. End points included 30-day all-cause mortality, procedural complications (according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria), procedure duration, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) and overall hospital LOS. For 30-day all-cause mortality, we furthermore used a Cox proportional-hazards model to adjust for significant between-group differences in baseline characteristics as well as difference in year of intervention.

RESULTS

TAVR was performed in 176 patients, using a TA approach (n = 127) or a TC approach (n = 49). Baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups, except age and peripheral artery disease. All-cause 30-day mortality rates were not significantly different (8.5% in the TA group vs 2.3% in the TC group, P = 0.124). TC approach was associated with significantly shorter procedure duration {71.0 [interquartile range (IQR) 52.5-101.0] vs 93 [IQR 80.0-120.0] min, P < 0.001}, shorter ICU LOS [0.0 (IQR 0.0-0.0) vs 1.0 (IQR 1.0-3.0) days, P < 0.001] and shorter hospital LOS [7.0 (IQR 5.0-9.5) vs 14.0 (IQR 10.0-22.0) days, P < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

The TC approach may be a good first-choice alternative in case of contraindications to transfemoral-TAVR.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Transfemoral approach is the standard access-route for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, alternative approaches are needed in a number of patients and accesses such as transapical (TA) TAVR or transcervical (TC) are used. We aimed to compare clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after TA-TAVR or TC-TAVR.

METHODS

All patients who underwent TA- and TC-TAVR for severe aortic stenosis in our institution between 2008 and 2020 were retrospectively included. End points included 30-day all-cause mortality, procedural complications (according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria), procedure duration, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) and overall hospital LOS. For 30-day all-cause mortality, we furthermore used a Cox proportional-hazards model to adjust for significant between-group differences in baseline characteristics as well as difference in year of intervention.

RESULTS

TAVR was performed in 176 patients, using a TA approach (n = 127) or a TC approach (n = 49). Baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups, except age and peripheral artery disease. All-cause 30-day mortality rates were not significantly different (8.5% in the TA group vs 2.3% in the TC group, P = 0.124). TC approach was associated with significantly shorter procedure duration {71.0 [interquartile range (IQR) 52.5-101.0] vs 93 [IQR 80.0-120.0] min, P < 0.001}, shorter ICU LOS [0.0 (IQR 0.0-0.0) vs 1.0 (IQR 1.0-3.0) days, P < 0.001] and shorter hospital LOS [7.0 (IQR 5.0-9.5) vs 14.0 (IQR 10.0-22.0) days, P < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

The TC approach may be a good first-choice alternative in case of contraindications to transfemoral-TAVR.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 17 Feb 2021
1 download since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, further contribution
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Cardiac Surgery
04 Faculty of Medicine > Cardiocentro Ticino
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Scopus Subject Areas:Health Sciences > Surgery
Health Sciences > Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
Health Sciences > Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Language:English
Date:7 December 2020
Deposited On:17 Feb 2021 07:37
Last Modified:18 Feb 2021 21:00
Publisher:Oxford University Press
ISSN:1569-9285
OA Status:Closed
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivaa202
PubMed ID:33051655

Download

Closed Access: Download allowed only for UZH members