Key result
Transcarotid access for TAVR resulted in similar 30-day mortality (4.8% vs 3.2%, P=1.00) and 2-year mortality (11.3% vs 12.9%, P=0.64) compared to transfemoral access.
Why the study?
Outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement comparing transfemoral and transcarotid access required evaluation.
Does transcarotid access for TAVR provide comparable outcomes to transfemoral access in patients undergoing TAVR?
Cohort (n=511)
No
Does transcarotid access for TAVR provide comparable outcomes to transfemoral access in patients undergoing TAVR?
Absolute Event Rate: 4.8% vs 3.2%
p-value: p=1.00
Transcarotid access for TAVR is a safe and valid alternative to transfemoral access, with comparable mortality and lower rates of permanent pacemaker implantation, though with a non-significant numerical increase in stroke.
Transcarotid access may be considered when transfemoral is infeasible; leaves open need for randomized confirmation of stroke and pacemaker risks.
Objectives To compare the outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) through a transfemoral (TF) and transcarotid (TC) access at our institution. Methods From January 2014 to January 2020, 62 TC-TAVR and 449 TF-TAVR were performed using 2 prosthesis devices (Edwards SAPIEN 3, n = 369; Medtronic Evolut R, n = 142). Propensity score matching was used to adjust for imbalance in the baseline characteristics of the study groups. Results Propensity score matching provided 62 matched pairs with comparable operative risk (mean European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II, TC-TAVR 7.6% vs TF-TAVR 6.6%, P = .17). Thirty-day mortality (4.8% vs 3.2%, P = 1.00) and 2-year mortality (11.3% vs 12.9%, P = .64) after TC-TAVR were comparable with TF-TAVR. Strokes were numerically more frequent after TC-TAVR compared with TF-TAVR (3.2% vs 0%, P = .23), but the difference did not reach statistical significance. TF-TAVR was associated with a significantly greater risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (29.0% vs 12.9%, P = .04) compared with TC-TAVR. Other complications were not frequent and were similarly distributed between the matched groups. Conclusions TC access for TAVR was associated with satisfactory results compared to the femoral access. TC-TAVR could be considered a valid and safe alternative to TF-TAVR when femoral access is contraindicated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Olivier et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (n=511). Transcarotid access (TC-TAVR) vs. Transfemoral access (TF-TAVR) was evaluated on 30-day mortality (p=1.00). Transcarotid access for TAVR resulted in similar 30-day mortality (4.8% vs 3.2%, P=1.00) and 2-year mortality (11.3% vs 12.9%, P=0.64) compared to transfemoral access.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: