Key result
Selective post-TAVI iliofemoral angiography shows no benefit over routine angiography for vascular complications.
Why the study?
Postprocedural iliofemoral angiography is commonly used to detect access-site complications after TF-TAVI, but the clinical value of routine angiographic surveillance remains uncertain.
Does routine postprocedural iliofemoral angiography reduce vascular and access-site complications compared to selective angiography in patients undergoing TF-TAVI?
Observational (n=1,147)
Yes
Does routine postprocedural iliofemoral angiography reduce vascular and access-site complications compared to selective angiography in patients undergoing TF-TAVI?
Odds Ratio: 0.76 (95% CI 0.48–1.19)
Absolute Event Rate: 6.6% vs 8%
p-value: p=0.234
Routine postprocedural angiography after TF-TAVI increases the detection of minor access-site bleedings and catheter-based interventions without improving overall clinical outcomes compared to a selective, suspicion-guided approach.
Selective angiography after TF-TAVI was associated with similar vascular complications; leaves open whether routine use improves outcomes or increases minor bleeding detection.
BACKGROUND: Postprocedural iliofemoral angiography is commonly used to detect access-site complications after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI). However, the clinical value of routine angiographic surveillance remains uncertain. AIMS: To compare vascular and access-site-related complications according to Vascular Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) criteria associated with routine and selective postprocedural iliofemoral angiography after TF-TAVI. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 1,147 TF-TAVI procedures at 2 sites of a single center with different institutional strategies for postprocedural angiographic assessment. One site routinely performed iliofemoral angiography after TAVI (n = 674), whereas the other applied a selective strategy based on procedural suspicion (n = 473). RESULTS: Vascular and access-site complications (VARC-3) were similar between strategies (selective 6.6% vs routine 8.0%; OR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.48-1.19). Routine angiography detected more access-site bleedings (13.9% vs 5.2%; P < 0.001), without differences in hemoglobin drop, transfusion due to access-site bleeding, or bleeding-related death. Overall vascular reinterventions were comparable (4.2% vs 6.5%; P = 0.095), with more catheter-based interventions in the routine strategy and more surgical/thrombin-based interventions in the selective strategy. In adjusted and inverse probability of treatment weights-weighted analyses, bleeding complications remained lower with the selective strategy, whereas overall VARC-3 complications did not differ. After adjustment using the inverse probability of treatment weights model, the angiography strategy was not associated with acute kidney injury despite higher total contrast in the routine group. CONCLUSION: Routine angiography increases detection of minor vascular abnormalities, while selective angiography guided by clinical suspicion may provide comparable clinical outcomes. Routine postprocedural angiography may be unnecessary in many patients. Prospective randomized studies are needed to determine the optimal surveillance strategy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ehr et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (n=1,147). Selective postprocedural iliofemoral angiography vs. Routine postprocedural iliofemoral angiography was evaluated on Vascular and access-site complications according to VARC-3 criteria (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48-1.19, p=0.234). A selective strategy for postprocedural iliofemoral angiography after TAVI yielded similar VARC-3 vascular complications compared to routine angiography (6.6% vs 8.0%; OR 0.76) but detected fewer minor access-site bleedings.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: