Access Options for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Unfavorable Aortoiliofemoral Anatomy

Current Cardiology Reports

Volumn 18, Issue 11, 2016, Pages

  Patel, Jayendrakumar S ^a   Krishnaswamy, Amar ^a   Svensson, Lars G ^a   Tuzcu, E Murat ^a   Mick, Stephanie ^a   Kapadia, Samir R ^a  

^a LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Nontransfemoral access; TAVR

Indexed keywords

CAVAL AORTIC APPROACH; DIRECT AORTIC APPROACH; FEMORAL ARTERY; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); MULTICENTER STUDY (TOPIC); REVIEW; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL RISK; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); TRANSAORTIC APPROACH; TRANSAPICAL APPROACH; TRANSCAROTID APPROACH; TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE IMPLANTATION; TRANSCAVAL APPROACH; TRANSFEMORAL ACCESS; TRANSSEPTAL ANTEGRADE APPROACH; TRANSSUBCLAVIAN APPROACH; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VASCULAR ACCESS; ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS; DEVICES; FLUOROSCOPY; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; QUALITY OF LIFE; RISK FACTOR;

AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS; CARDIAC CATHETERIZATION; FEMORAL ARTERY; FLUOROSCOPY; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; QUALITY OF LIFE; RISK FACTORS; TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84988422739     PISSN: 15233782     EISSN: 15343170     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11886-016-0788-8     Document Type: Review

References (71)

1. Dewey TM, Walther T, Doss M, et al. Transapical aortic valve implantation: an animal feasibility study. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;82:110–6.
2. Blackstone EH, Suri RM, Rajeswaran J, et al. Propensity-matched comparisons of clinical outcomes after transapical or transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER)-I trial substudy. Circulation. 2015;131:1989–2000. Compared TA with TF approach and found a higher liklihood of adverse periprocedural events and prolonged recovery with TA approach. Stroke risk was equivalent with both approaches.
3. Makkar RR, Fontana GP, Jilaihawi H, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement for inoperable severe aortic stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1696–704.
4. Kapadia SR, Leon MB, Makkar RR, et al. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard treatment for patients with inoperable aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2485–91.
5. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1597–607.
6. Kapadia SR, Tuzcu EM, Makkar RR, et al. Long-term outcomes of inoperable patients with aortic stenosis randomly assigned to transcatheter aortic valve replacement or standard therapy. Circulation. 2014;130:1483–92.
7. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1609–20.
8. Webb JG, Doshi D, Mack MJ, et al. A Randomized Evaluation of the SAPIEN XT Transcatheter Heart Valve System in Patients With Aortic Stenosis Who Are Not Candidates for Surgery. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:1797–806.
9. Kodali SK, O’Neill WW, Moses JW, et al. Early and late (one year) outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severe aortic stenosis (from the United States REVIVAL trial). Am J Cardiol. 2011;107:1058–64.
10. Aguirre J, Waskowski R, Poddar K, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: experience with the transapical approach, alternate access sites, and concomitant cardiac repairs. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;148:1417–22.
11. Al Kindi AH, Salhab KF, Roselli EE, Kapadia S, Tuzcu EM, Svensson LG. Alternative access options for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with no conventional access and chest pathology. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;147:644–51.
12. Svensson LG, Dewey T, Kapadia S, et al. United States feasibility study of transcatheter insertion of a stented aortic valve by the left ventricular apex. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86:46–54. discussion 54-5.
13. Svensson LG, Blackstone EH, Rajeswaran J, et al. Comprehensive analysis of mortality among patients undergoing TAVR: results of the PARTNER trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:158–68. Demonstrated an elevated periprocedural risk associated with TA approach over TF approach.
14. Thourani VH, Kodali S, Makkar RR, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis. Lancet. 2016.
15. Kodali S, Thourani VH, White J, et al. Early clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve replacement in inoperable, high-risk and intermediate-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Eur Heart J. 2016.
16. Ducrocq G, Francis F, Serfaty JM, et al. Vascular complications of transfemoral aortic valve implantation with the Edwards SAPIEN prosthesis: incidence and impact on outcome. EuroIntervention. 2010;5:666–72.
17. Krishnaswamy A, Parashar A, Agarwal S, et al. Predicting vascular complications during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement using computed tomography: a novel area-based index. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;84:844–51. Found that a sheath to femoral artery diameter and area ratios predict vascular complications in patients undergoing TF TAVR.
18. Ziegelmueller JA, Lange R, Bleiziffer S. Access and closure of the left ventricular apex: state of play. J Thorac Dis. 2015;7:1548–55.
19. Kodali SK, Williams MR, Smith CR, et al. Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1686–95.
20. Mack MJ, Leon MB, Smith CR, et al. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2477–84.
21. Thourani VH, Jensen HA, Babaliaros V, et al. Outcomes in Nonagenarians Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the PARTNER-I Trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100:785–92. discussion 793.
22. Williams M, Kodali SK, Hahn RT, et al. Sex-related differences in outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis: insights from the PARTNER Trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1522–8.
23. Thourani VH, Jensen HA, Babaliaros V, et al. Transapical and Transaortic Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the United States. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100:1718–26. discussion 1726-7. Found no difference in mortality or stroke between TA and DA access.
24. Thomas M, Schymik G, Walther T, et al. Thirty-day results of the SAPIEN aortic Bioprosthesis European Outcome (SOURCE) Registry: a European registry of transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the Edwards SAPIEN valve. Circulation. 2010;122:62–9.
25. Webb JG, Altwegg L, Boone RH, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: impact on clinical and valve-related outcomes. Circulation. 2009;119:3009–16.
26. Himbert D, Descoutures F, Al-Attar N, et al. Results of transfemoral or transapical aortic valve implantation following a uniform assessment in high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:303–11.
27. Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2187–98.
28. Ewe SH, Delgado V, Ng AC, et al. Outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: transfemoral versus transapical approach. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92:1244–51.
29. Genereux P, Cohen DJ, Williams MR, et al. Bleeding complications after surgical aortic valve replacement compared with transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from the PARTNER I Trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1100–9.
30. Kodali S, Williams MR, Doshi D, et al. Sex-specific differences at presentation and outcomes among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164:377–84.
31. Lefevre T, Kappetein AP, Wolner E, et al. One year follow-up of the multi-centre European PARTNER transcatheter heart valve study. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:148–57.
32. Gada H, Kirtane AJ, Wang K, et al. Temporal trends in quality of life outcomes after transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve (PARTNER) Trial Substudy. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015;8:338–46.
33. Rahnavardi M, Santibanez J, Sian K, Yan TD. A systematic review of transapical aortic valve implantation. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;1:116–28. Systematic review of the TA approach demonstrating safety and efficacy.
34. Walther T, Simon P, Dewey T, et al. Transapical minimally invasive aortic valve implantation: multicenter experience. Circulation. 2007;116:I240–5.
35. Rodes-Cabau J, Webb JG, Cheung A, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in patients at very high or prohibitive surgical risk: acute and late outcomes of the multicenter Canadian experience. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:1080–90.
36. Walther T, Thielmann M, Kempfert J, et al. PREVAIL TRANSAPICAL: multicentre trial of transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the newly designed bioprosthesis (SAPIEN-XT) and delivery system (ASCENDRA-II). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;42:278–83. discussion 283.
37. Walther T, Thielmann M, Kempfert J, et al. One-year multicentre outcomes of transapical aortic valve implantation using the SAPIEN XT valve: the PREVAIL transapical study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2013;43:986–92. Studied newer generation Sapien XT device delivery system.
38. Biancari F, Rosato S, D’Errigo P, et al. Immediate and Intermediate Outcome After Transapical Versus Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. Am J Cardiol. 2016;117:245–51. Demonstrated higher survival with TF approach over TA approach.
39. Suri RM, Minha S, Alli O et al. Learning curves for transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the PARTNER-I trial: technical performance, success, and safety. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016. Highlights the existence of a learning curve for TA-TAVR.
40. Unbehaun A, Pasic M, Drews T, et al. Analysis of survival in 300 high-risk patients up to 2.5 years after transapical aortic valve implantation. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92:1315–23.
41. Ye J, Cheung A, Lichtenstein SV, et al. Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation: follow-up to 3 years. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010;139:1107-13. 1113 e1.
42. Kempfert J, Rastan A, Holzhey D, et al. Transapical aortic valve implantation: analysis of risk factors and learning experience in 299 patients. Circulation. 2011;124:S124–9.
43. Dewey TM, Bowers B, Thourani VH, et al. Transapical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis: results from the nonrandomized continued access cohort of the PARTNER trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013;96:2083–9. Highlights the existence of a learning curve for TA-TAVR.
44. Eggebrecht H, Schmermund A, Voigtlander T, Kahlert P, Erbel R, Mehta RH. Risk of stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): a meta-analysis of 10,037 published patients. EuroIntervention. 2012;8:129–38.
45. Thourani VH, Li C, Devireddy C, et al. High-risk patients with inoperative aortic stenosis: use of transapical, transaortic, and transcarotid techniques. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;99:817–23. discussion 823-5. Demonstrated excellent outcomes with alternative access TAVR in patients with unfavorable TF access.
46. Thourani VH, Gunter RL, Neravetla S, et al. Use of transaortic, transapical, and transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement in inoperable patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013;96:1349–57.
47. Moat NE, Ludman P, de Belder MA, et al. Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: the U.K. TAVI (United Kingdom Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:2130–8.
48. Erdoes G, Basciani R, Huber C, et al. Transcranial Doppler-detected cerebral embolic load during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;41:778–83. discussion 783-4.
49. Rodes-Cabau J, Dumont E, Boone RH, et al. Cerebral embolism following transcatheter aortic valve implantation: comparison of transfemoral and transapical approaches. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:18–28.
50. Schafer U, Ho Y, Frerker C, et al. Direct percutaneous access technique for transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve implantation: “the Hamburg Sankt Georg approach”. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:477–86.
51. Fraccaro C, Napodano M, Tarantini G, et al. Expanding the eligibility for transcatheter aortic valve implantation the trans-subclavian retrograde approach using: the III generation CoreValve revalving system. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:828–33.
52. Adamo M, Fiorina C, Curello S, et al. Role of different vascular approaches on transcatheter aortic valve implantation outcome: a single-center study. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2015;16:279–85.
53. Petronio AS, De Carlo M, Bedogni F, et al. Safety and efficacy of the subclavian approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the CoreValve revalving system. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:359–66.
54. Petronio AS, De Carlo M, Bedogni F, et al. 2-year results of CoreValve implantation through the subclavian access: a propensity-matched comparison with the femoral access. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:502–7. Provides evidence for subclavian TAVR.
55. Ciuca C, Tarantini G, Latib A, et al. Trans-subclavian versus transapical access for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a multicenter study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;87:332–8. Demonstrated equivalent 1 and 2 year survival rates between subclavian and TA access.
56. Bapat VN, Attia RQ, Thomas M. Distribution of calcium in the ascending aorta in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation and its relevance to the transaortic approach. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:470–6.
57. Okuyama K, Jilaihawi H, Mirocha J, et al. Alternative access for balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement: comparison of the transaortic approach using right anterior thoracotomy to partial J-sternotomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149:789–97.
58. Seiffert M, Schnabel R, Conradi L, et al. Predictors and outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation using different approaches according to the valve academic research consortium definitions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;82:640–52.
59. Ramlawi B, Abu Saleh WK, Jabbari OA, et al. Short-Term Outcomes with Direct Aortic Access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. J Heart Valve Dis. 2015;24:426–32. Provides short term data for the direct aortic approach.
60. Lardizabal JA, O’Neill BP, Desai HV, et al. The transaortic approach for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: initial clinical experience in the United States. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:2341–5.
61. Suri RM, Gulack BC, Brennan JM, et al. Outcomes of Patients With Severe Chronic Lung Disease Who Are Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100:2136–45. discussion 2145-6.
62. Azmoun A, Amabile N, Ramadan R, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation through carotid artery access under local anaesthesia. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2014;46:693–8. discussion 698.
63. Modine T, Sudre A, Delhaye C, et al. Transcutaneous aortic valve implantation using the left carotid access: feasibility and early clinical outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;93:1489–94.
64. Mylotte D, Sudre A, Teiger E, et al. Transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement: feasibility and safety. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:472–80. Describes safety and efficacy of transcarotid approach.
65. Lederman RJ, Babaliaros VC, Greenbaum AB. How to perform transcaval access and closure for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86:1242–54. Excellent description of technique for transcaval TAVR.
66. Greenbaum AB, O’Neill WW, Paone G, et al. Caval-aortic access to allow transcatheter aortic valve replacement in otherwise ineligible patients: initial human experience. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:2795–804.
67. Greenbaum A. Transcaval TAVR: technique, rationale, and complications. Transcatheter Valve Therapeutics annual meeting. Chicago, Illinois, June 4, 2015.
68. Martinez-Clark PO, Singh V, Cadena JA, et al. Transcaval retrograde transcatheter aortic valve replacement for patients with no other access: first-in-man experience with CoreValve. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:1075–7.
69. Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Tron C, et al. Early experience with percutaneous transcatheter implantation of heart valve prosthesis for the treatment of end-stage inoperable patients with calcific aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:698–703.
70. Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Tron C, et al. Treatment of calcific aortic stenosis with the percutaneous heart valve: mid-term follow-up from the initial feasibility studies: the French experience. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:1214–23.
71. Cohen MG, Singh V, Martinez CA, et al. Transseptal antegrade transcatheter aortic valve replacement for patients with no other access approach - a contemporary experience. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;82:987–93. Contemporary experience with the transseptal approach.