Right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement is comparable to left despite challenges.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Daniel McGrath, Hansuh Lee, Charley Sun, Masashi Kawabori, Yong Zhan
{"title":"Right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement is comparable to left despite challenges.","authors":"Daniel McGrath, Hansuh Lee, Charley Sun, Masashi Kawabori, Yong Zhan","doi":"10.1007/s11748-024-02015-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Transaxillary access is the most popular alternative to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Although left transaxillary access is generally preferred, right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement could be challenging because of the opposing axillary artery and aortic curvatures, which may warrant procedural modifications to improve alignment. Our aim is to compare our single center's outcomes for left and right transaxillary access groups and to evaluate procedural modifications for facilitating right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared for consecutive left or right axillary TAVRs performed from 6/2016 to 6/2022 with SAPIEN 3. The effects of our previously reported \"flip-n-flex\" technique on procedural efficiency and new conduction disturbances were subanalyzed in the right axillary group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Right and left transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement were performed in 25 (18 with the \"flip-n-flex\" technique) and 26 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between patient characteristics or outcomes. Right axillary subanalysis showed the \"flip-n-flex\" technique group had significantly shorter fluoroscopy times (21.2 ± 6.2 vs 29.6 ± 12.4 min, p = 0.03) and a trend towards less permanent pacemaker implantation (6.3% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.07) compared to the group without \"flip-n-flex\".</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In our study, despite anatomical challenges, right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement is comparable to left access. The \"flip-n-flex\" technique advances right transaxillary as an appealing access for patients with few options.</p>","PeriodicalId":12585,"journal":{"name":"General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"641-648"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-024-02015-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Transaxillary access is the most popular alternative to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Although left transaxillary access is generally preferred, right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement could be challenging because of the opposing axillary artery and aortic curvatures, which may warrant procedural modifications to improve alignment. Our aim is to compare our single center's outcomes for left and right transaxillary access groups and to evaluate procedural modifications for facilitating right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Methods: Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared for consecutive left or right axillary TAVRs performed from 6/2016 to 6/2022 with SAPIEN 3. The effects of our previously reported "flip-n-flex" technique on procedural efficiency and new conduction disturbances were subanalyzed in the right axillary group.

Results: Right and left transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement were performed in 25 (18 with the "flip-n-flex" technique) and 26 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between patient characteristics or outcomes. Right axillary subanalysis showed the "flip-n-flex" technique group had significantly shorter fluoroscopy times (21.2 ± 6.2 vs 29.6 ± 12.4 min, p = 0.03) and a trend towards less permanent pacemaker implantation (6.3% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.07) compared to the group without "flip-n-flex".

Conclusions: In our study, despite anatomical challenges, right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement is comparable to left access. The "flip-n-flex" technique advances right transaxillary as an appealing access for patients with few options.

Abstract Image

右侧经腋窝经导管主动脉瓣置换术与左侧相比,尽管存在挑战。
目的:经腋窝入路是经胸主动脉瓣置换术最常用的替代方法。虽然左侧经腋窝入路通常是首选,但右侧经腋窝经导管主动脉瓣置换术可能具有挑战性,因为腋窝动脉和主动脉曲度相对,可能需要进行程序修改以改善对位。我们的目的是比较我们单个中心左侧和右侧经腋窝入路组的结果,并评估促进右侧经腋窝经导管主动脉瓣置换术的程序修改:比较了2016年6月至2022年6月期间使用SAPIEN 3进行的连续左侧或右侧腋窝TAVR的患者特征和结果。在右腋窝组中,对我们之前报道的 "翻转-n-flex "技术对手术效率和新的传导障碍的影响进行了亚分析:结果:分别有 25 名和 26 名患者接受了右侧和左侧经腋窝经导管主动脉瓣置换术(其中 18 名患者采用了 "翻转-屈曲 "技术)。患者特征和预后无明显差异。右腋窝亚分析显示,与未采用 "翻转-屈曲 "技术的组别相比,"翻转-屈曲 "技术组的透视时间明显缩短(21.2±6.2 vs 29.6±12.4分钟,p = 0.03),永久起搏器植入率也呈下降趋势(6.3% vs 42.9%,p = 0.07):结论:在我们的研究中,尽管存在解剖上的挑战,但右侧经腋窝经导管主动脉瓣置换术与左侧入路的效果相当。翻转-屈曲 "技术将右侧经腋窝作为一种有吸引力的入路,供选择较少的患者使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
142
期刊介绍: The General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery is the official publication of The Japanese Association for Thoracic Surgery and The Japanese Association for Chest Surgery, the affiliated journal of The Japanese Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, that publishes clinical and experimental studies in fields related to thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信