Key result
Trans-carotid TAVR emerges as a less invasive alternative to transthoracic access when transfemoral routes fail.
Why the study?
Transfemoral TAVR is not feasible in approximately 15% of patients, and prospective studies comparing alternative access routes are needed to guide clinical decision-making.
Although transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the gold standard, this approach is not be feasible in approximately 15% of the patients. Trans-carotid TAVR may be less invasive than transthoracic routes for TAVR, and has been associated with encouraging results. Further prospective studies comparing alternative access routes in patients with whom transfemoral TAVR is not feasible are warranted, to propose an evidence-based algorithm guiding the physician decision.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guedeney et al. (2018) conducted an editorial in Patients requiring transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Trans-carotid TAVR vs. Transthoracic TAVR routes was evaluated. Trans-carotid TAVR may serve as a less invasive alternative to transthoracic routes when transfemoral access is not feasible, highlighting the need for further prospective comparative studies.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: