Why the study?
Does the transapical TAVI approach cause more myocardial injury compared to the non-transapical approach in patients undergoing TAVI?
Does the transapical TAVI approach cause more myocardial injury compared to the non-transapical approach in patients undergoing TAVI?
Transapical TAVI is associated with new focal myocardial necrosis in the apex, unlike non-transapical approaches, despite systemic biomarker increases in both.
TA TAVI was associated with new apical necrosis unlike non-TA approaches; leaves open effects on outcomes and access selection.
AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence, localisation and extent of myocardial injury as determined by late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) on cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 37 patients, who underwent successful TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve (transapical [TA], n=11; non-TA, n=26), were included. Cardiac biomarker (CK-MB and cTnT) levels were determined at baseline and following TAVI. CMR was performed within a week before and within 30 days following TAVI. Some increase in cardiac biomarkers was detected in 97% of the patients as determined by a rise in cTnT, and in 49% of the patients as determined by a rise in CK-MB. Following TAVI, no new myocardial necrosis defects were observed with the non-TA approach. Nonetheless, all patients who underwent TAVI through the TA approach had new focal myocardial necrosis in the apex, with a median myocardial extent and necrotic mass of 5% [2.0-7.0] and 3.5 g [2.3-4.5], respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although some increase in cardiac biomarkers of myocardial injury was systematically detected following TAVI, new myocardial necrosis as evaluated by CMR was observed only in patients undergoing the procedure through the TA approach, involving ~5% of the myocardium in the apex.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ribeiro et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: