Why the study?
Patients undergoing TAVR with prohibitive iliofemoral disease require nonfemoral access, but direct comparative data between transcarotid and trans-subclavian access routes are limited.
Does transcarotid access improve short-term outcomes compared to transaxillary access in patients with prohibitive iliofemoral disease undergoing TAVR?
Does transcarotid access improve short-term outcomes compared to transaxillary access in patients with prohibitive iliofemoral disease undergoing TAVR?
This study aims to provide comparative data on short-term outcomes between transcarotid and transaxillary access routes for TAVR in patients with prohibitive iliofemoral disease.
Transcarotid access may shorten procedural metrics and stays versus trans-subclavian; leaves open need for randomized confirmation before practice change.
Objective: Patients with prohibitive iliofemoral disease undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) often require alternative, nonfemoral access for valve delivery and implantation. To date, there is a paucity of data directly comparing the transcarotid and trans-subclavian access routes. We thus sought to evaluate the short-term outcomes of both approaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amer et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: