Suprasternal Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Marginal Femoral Access. Issue 1 (January 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kiser, Andy C.; Caranasos, Thomas G.; Peterson, Mark D.; Holzhey, David M.; Kiefer, Philipp; Wiley Nifong, L.; Borger, Michael A.
• Is Part Of: Innovations. Volume 13:Issue 1(2018)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 4
• Publication Date: 2018-01
• Subjects: Cardiac catheterization/intervention -- Endovascular procedures -- Heart valve replacement -- Transcatheter aortic valve replacement -- TAVR -- Transaortic access; Cardiovascular system -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Heart -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Blood-vessels -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Chest -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Thoracic Surgical Procedures -- methods -- Periodicals; Vascular Surgical Procedures -- methods -- Periodicals; Thorax -- Chirurgie -- Méthodologie -- Périodiques; Vaisseaux sanguins -- Chirurgie -- Méthodologie -- Périodiques; Blood-vessels -- Surgery; Chest -- Surgery; Periodicals; 617.41
• DOI: 10.1177/155698451801300101
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1556-9845

Abstract

Objective: Recently, the PARTNER 2A trial reported results of transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical aortic valve replacement in 2032 intermediate-risk patients at 2 years. Two hundred thirty-six patients (24%) required an access route other than transfemoral. Compared with transfemoral and surgical aortic valve replacement, nontransfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with a numerically higher rate of death and disabling stroke at 30 days. This underscores the need for a better alternative surgical approach for patients with marginal femoral access. We reviewed our multicenter experience with minimally invasive suprasternal transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Methods: Consecutive patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis at high or intermediate risk for surgical aortic valve replacement underwent suprasternal transcatheter aortic valve replacement. A commercially available transcatheter heart valve was deployed under fluoroscopic guidance through the innominate artery or ascending aorta. Using a 3-cm skin incision just above the sternal notch, the Aegis Transit System (Aegis Surgical Ltd, Galway, Ireland) provided illuminated access to the mediastinum without bone disruption. Through a purse-string suture placed in the innominate artery or ascending aorta, transcatheter aortic valve replacement proceeded similarly to the direct aortic approach. Results: Thirty patients at six medical centers successfully underwent suprasternal transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Implanted valves included 2 CoreValve and 12 Evolut-R (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, MN USA), as well as 10 SAPIEN 3 and 6 SAPIEN XT (Edwards Lifesciences, Corp, Irvine, CA USA) with sizes ranging from 23 to 31 mm. Median procedure time was 90 minutes and median hospital stay was 4 days. Postoperatively, new permanent pacemaker (n = 3) was the most common Vascular Academic Research Consortium 2 complication. Conclusions: These data demonstrate the early clinical feasibility of suprasternal transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Key advantages of this approach include direct access to the innominate artery and ascending aorta, precise sheath control, and confident arterial closure. Additional experience is warranted to confirm these favorable results.