The 67th Annual Conference of the Israel Heart Society

Alternative vascular access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR), analysis from the Israeli transcatheter aortic valve replacement registry

Orr Tomer 1 Batla Falah 1 Amit Segev 2 Israel Barbash 2 Hannah Vaknin-Assa 3 Ran Kornowski 3 Amir Halkin 4 Ariel Finkelstein 4 Gidon Perlman 1 Haim Danenberg 1
1The Heart Institute, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
2Leviev Heart Center, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel
3Department of Cardiology, Rabin Medical Center, Petach Tikva, Israel
4Department of Cardiology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel

Introduction: TAVR is a reliable therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Femoral artery is the default access route for TAVR; however, when this route is precluded several alternative routes are available. Our aim was to compare patients’ characteristics and outcomes in alternative approach TAVR.

Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed the Israeli multicenter registry, during 2008-2019. Transapical or axillary access cases were compared to femoral artery ones. Direct-aortic and trans-caval approaches were too rare to be analyzed.

Results and discussion: A total of 4192 TAVRs were analyzed, femoral access (N=3949), transapical (N=153) and axillary (N=90). There was a clear trend towards increased femoral approach preference (85.12% in 2008-2011 vs. 97.72% in 2016-2019).
Alternative access patients had significantly higher rates of co-morbidities and higher STS scores (6.78 vs. 4.54, p-value<0.001).
Serious complications were more common in alternative access cases, including conversion to open surgery, stroke, acute kidney injury, new onset atrial fibrillation and development of heart-failure. However, the rates of vascular complications and new LBBB were higher following femoral approach. 30-days,1- and 5-years survival rates were higher for femoral artery access (all p <0.001).
Comparing transapical to axillary approach, transapical had significantly higher immediate complications including use of mechanical hemodynamic support, need for resuscitation and acute need for dialysis. 30-days survival rate were significantly worse for transapical approach (90.8% vs. 98.9%, p =0.01). Nevertheless, 1- and 5-years survival rates were not significantly different.

Conclusion: Alternative access approach TAVR is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Although transapical approach has a higher post procedural mortality rate, 1- and 5-years survival rate are similar to the axillary approach.

2-years survival









Powered by Eventact EMS