Alternative Percutaneous Access for Large Bore Devices
Key result
Transaxillary and transcaval access are the two most common alternative strategies for large-bore interventional procedures when common femoral access is unsuitable.
Why the study?
Common femoral access can be impossible or carry prohibitive risk in patients with challenging iliofemoral anatomy, necessitating alternative access strategies for large-bore transcatheter procedures.
Comparison
Transaxillary vs transcaval access
Design
Review article
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
May support transaxillary/transcaval as common femoral alternatives; leaves open comparative trials on selection and outcomes.
Structured PICO
P
Population
Patients requiring large-bore interventional procedures (e.g., temporary mechanical circulatory support implantation and structural heart therapies) with unsuitable iliofemoral anatomy
I
Intervention
Alternative percutaneous large-bore access strategies (transaxillary and transcaval access)
This review outlines the advantages, limitations, and methods of transaxillary and transcaval access as alternative strategies for large-bore interventional procedures when femoral access is unsuitable.
Cite This Study
Cheney et al. (2019) conducted a review in Need for large-bore interventional procedures. Alternative percutaneous large-bore access (transaxillary and transcaval) vs. Common femoral artery access was evaluated. Transaxillary and transcaval access are the two most common alternative strategies for large-bore interventional procedures when common femoral access is unsuitable.