[Complex femoral access in TAVI: From risk identification to alternative approaches].

IF 0.3 Q4 Medicine
I Skalidis, G Liccardo, T Hovasse, T Unterseeh, S Champagne, Y Lounes, A Neylon, M Akodad
{"title":"[Complex femoral access in TAVI: From risk identification to alternative approaches].","authors":"I Skalidis, G Liccardo, T Hovasse, T Unterseeh, S Champagne, Y Lounes, A Neylon, M Akodad","doi":"10.1016/j.ancard.2026.102090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the reference treatment for severe aortic stenosis across all surgical risk categories. Transfemoral access remains the default approach, but vascular complications, especially in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD), can limit its feasibility. This review follows a three-step structure. First, when to suspect complex femoral access? The concept of \"hostile\" access (small calibre, severe calcification, tortuosity) and the Hostile and Passage-Puncture scores allow this risk to be stratified from preoperative imaging. Second, how to manage a complex femoral access? Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and orbital atherectomy expand eligibility for transfemoral access in severe calcified PAD, dedicated techniques (buddy wire, snare) address aortic and iliofemoral tortuosity, and careful puncture-site planning limits local complications. Third, when and which alternative access to consider when transfemoral access remains unfeasible? Transaxillary/subclavian, transcarotid, transcaval or, more rarely, transapical/transaortic, are associated with different risks and selection criteria. As TAVI expands to lower-risk populations, a structured vascular access strategy remains essential to procedural success and to decrease vascular complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":7899,"journal":{"name":"Annales de cardiologie et d'angeiologie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annales de cardiologie et d'angeiologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancard.2026.102090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the reference treatment for severe aortic stenosis across all surgical risk categories. Transfemoral access remains the default approach, but vascular complications, especially in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD), can limit its feasibility. This review follows a three-step structure. First, when to suspect complex femoral access? The concept of "hostile" access (small calibre, severe calcification, tortuosity) and the Hostile and Passage-Puncture scores allow this risk to be stratified from preoperative imaging. Second, how to manage a complex femoral access? Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and orbital atherectomy expand eligibility for transfemoral access in severe calcified PAD, dedicated techniques (buddy wire, snare) address aortic and iliofemoral tortuosity, and careful puncture-site planning limits local complications. Third, when and which alternative access to consider when transfemoral access remains unfeasible? Transaxillary/subclavian, transcarotid, transcaval or, more rarely, transapical/transaortic, are associated with different risks and selection criteria. As TAVI expands to lower-risk populations, a structured vascular access strategy remains essential to procedural success and to decrease vascular complications.

[TAVI复杂股骨通路:从风险识别到替代入路]。
经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)已成为所有手术风险类别中严重主动脉瓣狭窄的参考治疗方法。经股入路仍然是默认的入路,但血管并发症,特别是外周动脉疾病(PAD)患者,限制了其可行性。这一审查遵循三步结构。一、何时怀疑复杂股骨通路?“敌对”通路(小口径、严重钙化、扭曲)的概念以及敌对和通道穿刺评分允许从术前影像学对这种风险进行分层。其次,如何处理复杂的股动脉通路?血管内碎石术(IVL)和眶动脉粥样硬化切除术扩大了严重钙化PAD经股动脉通路的可行性,专用技术(buddy wire,圈套)可解决主动脉和髂股弯曲,仔细的穿刺部位规划可限制局部并发症。第三,当经股动脉通路仍然不可行的时候,应该考虑什么时候和哪一种替代通路?经腋窝/锁骨下,经颈动脉,经颅或更罕见的经根尖/主动脉,有不同的风险和选择标准。随着TAVI扩展到低风险人群,结构化的血管通路策略对于手术成功和减少血管并发症仍然至关重要。
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Organe scientifique de référence fondé en 1951, les Annales de cardiologie et d''angéiologie abordent tous les domaines qui intéressent quotidiennement les cardiologues et les angéiologues praticiens : neurologie et radiologie vasculaires, hémostase, diabétologie, médecine interne, épidémiologie et prévention. Les Annales de cardiologie et d''angéiologie sont indexées aux grandes bases de données et publient rapidement, et en conformité avec les normes internationales de publication scientifique, des articles en français sur la pathologie cardiaque.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书