Key result
Percutaneous TF-TAVI puncture is linked to ~103% higher odds of access site complications versus open puncture.
Why the study?
Whether open or percutaneous puncture has lower vascular access site complications in TF-TAVI remains controversial, and risk factors for these complications are poorly characterized.
Does the percutaneous puncture approach compared to open puncture reduce vascular access site complications in patients undergoing TF-TAVI?
Cohort (n=351)
Does the percutaneous puncture approach compared to open puncture reduce vascular access site complications in patients undergoing TF-TAVI?
Open puncture may be preferable to percutaneous puncture for reducing vascular access site complications in TF-TAVI, particularly in patients with a common femoral artery depth ≥35 mm.
Percutaneous puncture linked to more complications after adjustment; leaves open optimal access technique pending randomized trials.
Background: In transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI), which approach has lower vascular access site complications between the open puncture (OP) and percutaneous puncture (PP) approaches is still controversial. Moreover, few studies have analyzed risk factors for vascular access site complications in TF-TAVI. This study aimed to compare vascular access site complications between the OP and PP approaches in patients undergoing TF-TAVI and access risk factors for vascular access site complications. Methods: Three hundred fifty-one patients who underwent TF-TAVI via the PP (n=251) and OP (n=100) were retrospectively examined. Results: Incidence of vascular access site complications was 7.0% in the OP group and 8.4% in the PP group (P=0.828). Two deaths from vascular access site complications occurred in the PP group. After performing inverse probability weighting (IPW), regression analysis showed that PP was associated with a significantly higher odds of vascular access site complications [odds ratio =2.033; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.397-2.958; P<0.001]. Common femoral artery (CFA) depth (hazard ratio =1.04; 95% CI: 1.000-1.070; P=0.045) and sheath/CFA diameter ratio (hazard ratio =971; 95% CI: 22.6-41,700; P<0.001) were independent complication risk factors. In patients with CFA depth ≥35 mm, the incidence of vascular access site complications was higher with PP than OP. Sheath/CFA diameter ratio ≥0.9 was associated with increased risk of vascular injury with both approaches. Conclusions: The incidence of vascular access site complications in patients undergoing TF-TAVI was significantly lower with OP than PP after IPW. OP may be preferable when CFA depth is ≥35 mm. When the sheath/CFA diameter ratio is ≥0.9, approaches other than the TF approach should be considered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sumii et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI) (n=351). Percutaneous puncture (PP) vs. Open puncture (OP) was evaluated on Vascular access site complications (OR 2.033, 95% CI 1.397-2.958, p=<0.001). Percutaneous puncture for TF-TAVI had significantly higher odds of vascular access site complications than open puncture after inverse probability weighting (OR 2.033; 95% CI 1.397-2.958; P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: