Key result
Intercostal transaortic TAVI is linked to similar 30-day mortality as mini-sternotomy but less paravalvular leakage.
Why the study?
Alternative approaches for TAVI are constantly improving, and transaortic access can be achieved via a sternum- and rib-sparing right anterior mini-thoracotomy instead of classical mini-sternotomy.
Does transaortic TAVI via intercostal thoracotomy improve outcomes compared to upper mini-sternotomy in elderly high-risk patients with aortic valve disease?
Cohort (n=173)
No
Does transaortic TAVI via intercostal thoracotomy improve outcomes compared to upper mini-sternotomy in elderly high-risk patients with aortic valve disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 6.6% vs 8.5%
p-value: p=0.364
Transaortic TAVI via an intercostal access is a safe and effective alternative to upper mini-sternotomy, offering shorter hospital stays and fewer blood transfusions despite higher baseline surgical risk.
Intercostal access may be a viable transaortic TAVI option in high-risk patients; leaves open confirmation of shorter stays in randomized trials.
Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is now a well-established therapeutic option in an elderly high-risk patient cohort with aortic valve disease. Although most commonly performed via a transfemoral route, alternative approaches for TAVI are constantly being improved. Instead of the classical mini-sternotomy, it is possible to achieve a transaortic access via a right anterior mini-thoracotomy in the second intercostal space. We describe our experience with this sternum- and rib-sparing technique in comparison to the classical transaortic approach. Methods: Our retrospective study includes 173 patients who were treated in our institution between January 2017 and April 2020 with transaortic TAVI via either upper mini-sternotomy or intercostal thoracotomy. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality, and secondary endpoints were defined as major postoperative complications that included admission to the intensive care unit and overall hospital stay, according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3. Results: Eighty-two patients were treated with TAo-TAVI by upper mini-sternotomy, while 91 patients received the intercostal approach. Both groups were comparable in age (mean age: 82 years) and in the proportion of female patients. The intercostal group had a higher rate of peripheral artery disease (41% vs. 22%, p = 0.008) and coronary artery disease (71% vs. 40%, p < 0.001) with a history of percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, resulting in significantly higher preinterventional risk evaluation (EuroScore II 8% in the intercostal vs. 4% in the TAo group, p = 0.005). Successful device implantation and a reduction of the transvalvular gradient were achieved in all cases with a significantly lower rate of trace to mild paravalvular leakage in the intercostal group (12% vs. 33%, p < 0.001). The intercostal group required significantly fewer blood transfusions (0 vs. 2 units, p = 0.001) and tended to require less reoperation (7% vs. 15%, p = 0.084). Hospital stays (9 vs. 12 d, p = 0.011) were also shorter in the intercostal group. Short- and long-term survival in the follow-up showed comparable results between the two approaches (30-day, 6-month- and 2-year mortality: 7%, 23% and 36% in the intercostal vs. 9%, 26% and 33% in the TAo group) with acute kidney injury (AKI) and reintubation being independent risk factors for mortality. Conclusions: Transaortic TAVI via an intercostal access offers a safe and effective treatment of aortic valve stenosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pommert et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Severe aortic stenosis (n=173). Transaortic TAVI via intercostal access vs. Transaortic TAVI via upper mini-sternotomy was evaluated on 30-day mortality (p=0.364). Transaortic TAVI via an intercostal access demonstrated comparable 30-day mortality to the upper mini-sternotomy approach (6.6% vs 8.5%, p=0.364), while significantly reducing paravalvular leakage and hospital stay.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: