Transapical Versus Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation: A Comparison of Survival and Safety

被引:67
作者
Johansson, Malin
Nozohoor, Shahab
Kimblad, Per Ola
Harnek, Jan
Olivecrona, Goran K.
Sjogren, Johan
机构
[1] Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Cardiothorac Surg, Lund, Sweden
[2] Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Cardiothorac Anesthesia & Intens Care, Lund, Sweden
[3] Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Coronary Heart Dis, Lund, Sweden
[4] Lund Univ, Lund, Sweden
关键词
VALVULAR HEART-DISEASE; PROPENSITY SCORES; LATE OUTCOMES; EXPERIENCE; RISK; STENOSIS; REPLACEMENT; EUROSCORE; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.07.072
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a therapeutic option for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Procedural mortality remains high in comparison with conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) because patients determined for TAVI are commonly denied conventional surgery. We aimed to evaluate access-related complications between the transfemoral (TF) and the transapical (TA) approach and to compare survival between TAVI and conventional AVR in propensity-score-matched patients. Methods. Between January 2008 and November 2009, 40 patients underwent TAVI (TF, n = 10; TA, n = 30) with the Edwards Sapien bioprosthesis (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA). Survival and postoperative complications were evaluated between the TF and the TA approach. A comparison of survival was made between the TAVI patients and propensity-score-matched patients undergoing conventional AVR. Results. Successful implantation rate was 92.5% (37 of 40). Thirty-day mortality was 5.0% (2 of 40), and the overall in-hospital mortality was 10.0% (4 of 40). Survival after TAVI was 77% at both 6 months and 1 year. Major vascular complications occurred in 3 of 10 patients (all in the TF group), and 3 of 40 patients (7.5%) suffered cerebrovascular events. A comparison of survival between TAVI and propensity score-matched conventional AVR patients showed no significant difference in either the TA group (p = 0.73) or the TF group (p = 0.59). Conclusions. The vascular complications occurring when using the TF approach were probably related to a combination of a wide introducer sheath and heavily calcified femoral arteries in a high-risk population. No serious complications were encountered when using the TA approach. After propensity-score matching, survival with both the TA and TF approaches is similar to that after AVR. (Ann Thorac Surg 2011;91:57-63) (C) 2011 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
引用
收藏
页码:57 / 63
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Transapical versus transfemoral aortic valve implantation
    Robb, J. Daniel
    Wendler, Olaf
    EUROINTERVENTION, 2011, 7 (01) : 39 - 40
  • [2] Comparison of Outcomes of Transfemoral Versus Transapical Approach for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation
    Kumar, Nilay
    Khera, Rohan
    Fonarow, Gregg C.
    Bhatt, Deepak L.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2018, 122 (09) : 1520 - 1526
  • [3] Transapical Versus Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation: A Multicenter Collaborative Study
    van der Boon, Robert M. A.
    Marcheix, Bertrand
    Tchetche, Didier
    Chieffo, Alaide
    Van Mieghem, Nicolas M.
    Dumonteil, Nicolas
    Vahdat, Olivier
    Maisano, Francesco
    Serruys, Patrick W.
    Kappetein, A. Pieter
    Fajadet, Jean
    Colombo, Antonio
    Carrie, Didier
    van Domburg, Ron T.
    de Jaegere, Peter P. T.
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2014, 97 (01) : 22 - 28
  • [4] Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Transfemoral Versus Transapical Approach
    Ewe, See Hooi
    Delgado, Victoria
    Ng, Arnold C. T.
    Antoni, M. Louisa
    van der Kley, Frank
    Marsan, Nina Ajmone
    de Weger, Arend
    Tavilla, Giuseppe
    Holman, Eduard R.
    Schalij, Martin J.
    Bax, Jeroen J.
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2011, 92 (04) : 1244 - 1251
  • [5] Comparison of early and midterm outcomes after transsubclavian/axillary versus transfemoral, transapical, or transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation
    Takagi, Hisato
    Hari, Yosuke
    Nakashima, Kouki
    Kuno, Toshiki
    Ando, Tomo
    HEART & LUNG, 2019, 49 (06): : 519 - 529
  • [6] Survival after transapical and transfemoral aortic valve implantation: Talking about two different patient populations
    Bleiziffer, Sabine
    Ruge, Hendrik
    Mazzitelli, Domenico
    Hutter, Andrea
    Opitz, Anke
    Bauernschmitt, Robert
    Lange, Ruediger
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2009, 138 (05) : 1073 - 1080
  • [7] A meta-analysis of adjusted observational studies for mortality in transapical versus transfemoral aortic valve implantation
    Takagi, Hisato
    Umemoto, Takuya
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2014, 174 (01) : 165 - 170
  • [8] Local versus general anesthesia for transfemoral aortic valve implantation
    Motloch, Lukas J.
    Rottlaender, Dennis
    Reda, Sara
    Larbig, Robert
    Bruns, Marie
    Mueller-Ehmsen, Jochen
    Strauch, Justus
    Madershahian, Navid
    Erdmann, Erland
    Wahlers, Thorsten
    Hoppe, Uta C.
    CLINICAL RESEARCH IN CARDIOLOGY, 2012, 101 (01) : 45 - 53
  • [9] Direct Comparison of Feasibility and Safety of Transfemoral Versus Transaortic Versus Transapical Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
    Arai, Takahide
    Romano, Mauro
    Lefevre, Thierry
    Hovasse, Thomas
    Farge, Arnaud
    Le Houerou, Daniel
    Hayashida, Kentaro
    Watanabe, Yusuke
    Garot, Philippe
    Benamer, Hakim
    Unterseeh, Thierry
    Bouvier, Erik
    Morice, Marie-Claude
    Chevalier, Bernard
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2016, 9 (22) : 2320 - 2325
  • [10] Complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation using transfemoral and transapical approach in general anaesthesia
    Wurschinger, Fabian
    Wittmann, Sigrid
    Goldfuss, Sophia
    Zech, Nina
    Debl, Kurt
    Hilker, Michael
    Graf, Bernhard M.
    Zausig, York A.
    PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (04):