Key result
Transaxillary access for TAVI resulted in similar 30-day (5% vs 6%, p=0.90) and 1-year (20% vs 16%, p=0.17) all-cause mortality compared to transfemoral access in a propensity-matched analysis.
Why the study?
Whether transaxillary access as preferred access has similar safety and efficacy compared to default transfemoral access in TAVI is unknown.
Does transaxillary access compared to transfemoral access improve outcomes in patients undergoing TAVI?
Cohort (n=6,334)
Yes
Does transaxillary access compared to transfemoral access improve outcomes in patients undergoing TAVI?
Absolute Event Rate: 5% vs 6%
p-value: p=0.90
Transaxillary access is a feasible and safe alternative to transfemoral access for TAVI, with comparable 30-day and 1-year mortality.
Supports TAx as viable preferred alternative when TF infeasible; leaves open confirmation via randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: Transfemoral (TF) access is default in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Transaxillary (TAx) access has been shown to be a safe alternative in case of prohibitive iliofemoral anatomy, but whether TAx as preferred access has similar safety and efficacy as TF access is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between patients treated with self-expanding devices using TF or TAx route as preferred access in TAVI. METHODS: A single center cohort of 354 patients treated using TAx as preferred access and a multi-center cohort of 5980 patients treated using TF access were compared. Propensity score matching was used to reduce selection bias and potential confounding. After propensity score matching, each group consisted of 322 patients. Clinical outcomes according to VARC-2 were compared using chi-square test. RESULTS: In 6334 patients undergoing TAVI, mean age was 81.4 ± 7.0 years, 57% was female and median logistic EuroSCORE was 14.7% (IQR 9.5-22.6). In the matched population (age 79.3 ± 7.0, 50% female, logistic EuroSCORE 13.4%, IQR 9.0-21.5), primary outcomes 30-day and one-year all-cause mortality were similar between Tax and TF groups (30 days: 5% versus 6%, p = 0.90; 1 year: 20% versus 16%, p = 0.17). Myocardial infarction was more frequent in patients undergoing Tax TAVI compared with TF (4% versus 1%, p = 0.05), but new permanent pacemakers were less frequently implanted (12% versus 21%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: TAx as preferred access is feasible and safe with outcomes that are comparable to TF access.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wely et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) (n=6,334). Transaxillary (TAx) access vs. Transfemoral (TF) access was evaluated on 30-day all-cause mortality (p=0.90). Transaxillary access for TAVI resulted in similar 30-day (5% vs 6%, p=0.90) and 1-year (20% vs 16%, p=0.17) all-cause mortality compared to transfemoral access in a propensity-matched analysis.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: