Non-femoral focused transaxillary access in TAVI: GARY data analysis and future trends

Max M Meertens,Matti Adam,Andreas Beckmann,Stephan Ensminger,Christian Frerker,Moritz Seiffert,Jan-Malte Sinning,Raffi Bekeredjian,Thomas Walther,Friedhelm Beyersdorf,Helge Möllmann,Ümniye Balaban,Kaveh Eghbalzadeh,Tanja K Rudolph,Sabine Bleiziffer,Meertens, Max M.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-024-02402-9
IF: 6.138
2024-03-05
Clinical Research in Cardiology
Abstract:Background In patients not suitable for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), several access strategies can be chosen. Aim To evaluate the use and patient outcomes of transaxillary (TAx), transapical (TA), and transaortic (TAo) as alternative access for TAVI in Germany; to further evaluate surgical cutdown vs. percutaneous TAx access. Methods All patients entered the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY) between 2011 and 2019 who underwent non-transfemoral TAVI were included in this analysis. Patients with TA, TAo, or TAx TAVI were compared using a weighted propensity score model. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis was performed for TAx regarding the percutaneous or surgical cutdown approach. Results Overall, 9686 patients received a non-transfemoral access. A total of 8918 patients (92.1%) underwent TA, 398 (4.1%) TAo, and 370 (3.8%) TAx approaches. Within the TAx subgroup, 141 patients (38.1%) received subclavian cutdown, while 200 (54.1%) underwent a percutaneous approach. The TA patients had a significantly lower 30-day survival than TAx patients (TA 90.92% vs. TAx 95.59%, p = 0.006; TAo 92.22% vs. TAx 95.59%, p = 0.102). Comparing percutaneous and cutdown TAx approaches, no significant differences were seen. However, more vascular complications occurred (TA 1.8%, TAo 2.4%, TAx 12.2%; p < .001), and the hospital length of stay was shorter (TA 12.9 days, TAo 14.1 days, TAx 12 days; p < .001) after TAx access. Conclusion It may be reasonable to consider TAx access first in patients not suitable for TF-TAVI, because the 30-day survival was higher compared with TA access and the 1-year survival was higher compared with TAo access. It remains important for the heart teams to offer alternative access modalities for patients not amenable to the standard TF-TAVI approaches. Graphical
cardiac & cardiovascular systems
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to evaluate the use and patient prognosis of the transaxillary (TAx), transapical (TA), and transaortic (TAo) approaches as alternative approaches in patients who are not suitable for the transfemoral (TF) approach for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI). Specifically, the study aims to: 1. **Evaluate the application and patient prognosis of non - femoral artery approaches in Germany**: By analyzing the data of the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY), compare the use and patient prognosis of the three non - femoral artery approaches, TAx, TA, and TAo. 2. **Further evaluate the two methods of percutaneous and surgical incision in the TAx approach**: In the TAx approach, compare the clinical effects of percutaneous puncture and surgical incision. ### Research background With the development of TAVI technology, more and more low - risk patients begin to receive this treatment. Although the transfemoral approach is the most commonly used method, for some patients whose anatomical structures are not suitable for the transfemoral approach, other alternative approaches need to be considered. The TAx approach has become a potential alternative approach because of its advantages such as larger blood vessel diameter, lower degree of calcification, closer distance to the heart, and superficial location. ### Research objectives 1. **Evaluate the use and patient prognosis of non - femoral artery approaches**: - Compare the 30 - day and 1 - year survival rates of the three approaches, TAx, TA, and TAo. - Compare the surgical characteristics such as surgical time, dose - area product (DAP), and contrast agent dosage of different approaches. - Compare the postoperative complications of different approaches, such as cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, bleeding, and vascular complications. 2. **Evaluate the effects of the two methods of percutaneous and surgical incision in the TAx approach**: - Compare the 30 - day and 1 - year survival rates of the two methods of percutaneous and surgical incision. - Compare the surgical time and hospitalization time of the two methods. - Compare the postoperative complications of the two methods. ### Main findings 1. **Overall results**: - A total of 9,686 patients received TAVI via non - femoral artery approaches, of which 8,918 (92.1%) used the TA approach, 398 (4.1%) used the TAo approach, and 370 (3.8%) used the TAx approach. - The 30 - day survival rate of the TAx approach was significantly higher than that of the TA approach (TAx 95.59% vs. TA 90.92%, p = 0.006), but there was no significant difference from the TAo approach (TAx 95.59% vs. TAo 92.22%, p = 0.102). - The 1 - year survival rate of the TAx approach was significantly higher than that of the TAo approach (TAx 73.70% vs. TAo 65.18%, p = 0.046), but there was no significant difference from the TA approach (TAx 73.70% vs. TA 70.90%, p = 0.319). 2. **Comparison between percutaneous and surgical incision in the TAx approach**: - The contrast agent dosage of the percutaneous TAx approach was significantly higher than that of the surgical incision approach (percutaneous 165.4 ml vs. surgical incision 127.9 ml, p < 0.001). - The 1 - year survival rate of the surgical incision approach was significantly higher than that of the percutaneous approach (surgical incision 84.0% vs. percutaneous 67.1%, p = 0.013). - There was no significant difference in the 30 - day survival rate between the two methods (surgical incision 94.9% vs. percutaneous 98.7%, p = 0.057). ### Conclusion Based on the results of propensity score - weighted analysis, for patients who are not suitable for the transfemoral approach, it is reasonable to consider the TAx approach first, because the 30 - day survival rate of the TAx approach is higher than that of the TA approach, and the 1 - year survival rate is higher than that of the TAo approach. Although the incidence of vascular complications in the TAx approach is relatively high, the length of stay in the ICU and the hospitalization time have not increased. However, the relatively high incidence of stroke in the TAx approach is worthy of attention and requires further research. The heart team should continue to provide multiple alternative approaches to meet the treatment needs of patients who are not suitable for the standard transfemoral approach.