TAVI via alternative access routes: patient selection and 10-year center experience

Abstract

Abstract Background Femoral access is considered the gold standard for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, this route might be precluded due to the presence of tortuosity, small vessel diameter and/or peripheral artery disease. We aimed to investigate TAVI through an alternative access (AA), focusing on the selection criteria and clinical outcomes compared to the femoral route (TF). Methods We conducted an all-comers longitudinal single-centre prospective registry in whom a TAVI was performed. The feasibility, safety and efficacy of TAVI by means of an access route other than standard TF was assessed, according to the VARC-2 criteria. The prospective surgical criteria used at our institution to accept an AA route were: a) TF deemed inappropriate; b) acceptable haemorrhagic risk; c) acceptable general anaesthesia risk; and d) adequate anatomy and diameter within acceptable range (subclavian, axillar, transaortic) or e) age <85 years and non-frail patient (transapical). The primary endpoint was all-cause death at 1-year. Results From 2008 to 2018, there were 548 patients submitted to TAVI [median age 84 (79–87) years, males 45.4%]. An AA route was used in 100 patients (79 trans-apical, 9 trans-aortic, and 12 trans-subclavian), with a decreasing rate over follow-up (−11% per year). Compared to TF, these patients were younger [80 (77–84) vs. 85 (80–87) years; p<0.001) with a similar baseline surgical risk as per EuroSCORE II [5.1 (3.3–9.0) vs. 4.7 (3.3–7.0); p=0.410). AA patients presented a higher burden of atherosclerotic disease, namely coronary (54.0 vs. 41.3%; p<0.001) and peripheral artery disease (35.0 vs. 16.5%, p<0.001) despite a lower number of other comorbidities (e.g. glomerular filtration rate <50mL/min: 53.1 vs. 64.8%; p=0.030). Left ventricular ejection fraction (56±13 vs 55±12%; p=0.203) and aortic stenosis severity (e.g. valve area: 0.70±0.19 vs. 0.67±0.18cm2; p=0.302) were similar between groups. Haemorrhagic events (minor or major) following TAVI were less often documented in the AA group (11.0 vs 21.7%; p=0.015), contrasting with de novo atrial fibrillation (18.5 vs 7.6%; p=0.048). Overall, 67 patients met the primary endpoint (18.8 vs 16.2%; p=0.584). After adjusted multivariate analysis, the independent predictors of one-year mortality did not include the TAVI access route. Conclusion In the first 10 years of experience, 1 in every 6 patients was treated with a TAVI by means of an AA, most often trans-apically initially and, nowadays, via a trans-subclavian approach. The use of meticulous prospective selection criteria seems to explain the one-year similar results, regardless of the access route. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.