An upfront combined strategy for endovascular haemostasis in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
Journal
EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology
ISSN: 1969-6213
Titre abrégé: EuroIntervention
Pays: France
ID NLM: 101251040
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Oct 2021
20 Oct 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
17
2
2021
medline:
23
2
2023
entrez:
16
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Vascular complications still represent an important issue after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of upfront use of an adjunctive Angio-Seal (AS) plug-based system on top of suture-based devices (SBDs) for endovascular haemostasis after transfemoral (TF) TAVI. From January 2019 to April 2020, 332 consecutive patients with preprocedural computed tomography angiography (CTA) assessment underwent fully percutaneous TF-TAVI. The primary outcomes were 30-day major vascular complications and major or life-threatening (LT) bleeding due to endovascular closure system failure. A total of 246 TF-TAVI patients (123 pairs), undergoing either isolated SBD or SBD+AS, were matched using the propensity-score method. At 30 days, patients receiving SBD+AS had lower rates of major/LT bleeding (1.6% vs 8.9%, odds ratio [OR] 0.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04-0.78; p<0.01) and major vascular complications (1.6% vs 8.9%, OR 0.17, 95% CI: 0.04-0.78; p<0.01). In addition, the use of SBD+AS was associated with a significant cost saving related to the vascular event (mean difference -315.3 € per patient, 95% CI: -566.4 € to -64.1 €; p=0.01), and a higher probability of next-day discharge (NDD) after TAVI (30.9% vs 16.3%, OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.25-4.25; p<0.01). No difference in all-cause 30-day mortality was observed (3.3% vs 1.6% for SBD and SBD+AS groups, respectively, OR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.09-2.74; p=0.41). An upfront combined strategy with an additional AS plug-based device on top of SBDs was shown to reduce major vascular complications and major/LT bleeding due to closure system failure after TF-TAVI. This approach was associated with a cost saving and with a higher probability of NDD compared to the use of isolated SBD. Visual summary. Effectiveness of the upfront combined strategy for endovascular haemostasis in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation using Angio-Seal on top of a suture-based device (SBD) versus the isolated use of SBD. LT: life-threatening; TF-TAVI: transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Vascular complications still represent an important issue after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of upfront use of an adjunctive Angio-Seal (AS) plug-based system on top of suture-based devices (SBDs) for endovascular haemostasis after transfemoral (TF) TAVI.
METHODS
METHODS
From January 2019 to April 2020, 332 consecutive patients with preprocedural computed tomography angiography (CTA) assessment underwent fully percutaneous TF-TAVI. The primary outcomes were 30-day major vascular complications and major or life-threatening (LT) bleeding due to endovascular closure system failure. A total of 246 TF-TAVI patients (123 pairs), undergoing either isolated SBD or SBD+AS, were matched using the propensity-score method.
RESULTS
RESULTS
At 30 days, patients receiving SBD+AS had lower rates of major/LT bleeding (1.6% vs 8.9%, odds ratio [OR] 0.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04-0.78; p<0.01) and major vascular complications (1.6% vs 8.9%, OR 0.17, 95% CI: 0.04-0.78; p<0.01). In addition, the use of SBD+AS was associated with a significant cost saving related to the vascular event (mean difference -315.3 € per patient, 95% CI: -566.4 € to -64.1 €; p=0.01), and a higher probability of next-day discharge (NDD) after TAVI (30.9% vs 16.3%, OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.25-4.25; p<0.01). No difference in all-cause 30-day mortality was observed (3.3% vs 1.6% for SBD and SBD+AS groups, respectively, OR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.09-2.74; p=0.41).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
An upfront combined strategy with an additional AS plug-based device on top of SBDs was shown to reduce major vascular complications and major/LT bleeding due to closure system failure after TF-TAVI. This approach was associated with a cost saving and with a higher probability of NDD compared to the use of isolated SBD. Visual summary. Effectiveness of the upfront combined strategy for endovascular haemostasis in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation using Angio-Seal on top of a suture-based device (SBD) versus the isolated use of SBD. LT: life-threatening; TF-TAVI: transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33589411
pii: EIJ-D-20-01125
doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01125
pmc: PMC9724957
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
728-735Références
J Vasc Surg. 2020 Dec;72(6):2120-2129.e2
pubmed: 32276023
EuroIntervention. 2016 Nov 20;12(10):1298-1304
pubmed: 27866140
Am J Cardiol. 2016 Oct 15;118(8):1244-1250
pubmed: 27638098
Minerva Cardioangiol. 2019 Dec;67(6):443-449
pubmed: 31670491
EuroIntervention. 2012 Nov 22;8(7):782-95
pubmed: 23022744
EuroIntervention. 2015 Oct;11(6):690-7
pubmed: 26499222
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020 Sep;21(9):1065-1073
pubmed: 31974033
Eur Heart J. 2015 Dec 14;36(47):3370-9
pubmed: 26314688
EuroIntervention. 2020 Aug 07;16(6):e494-e501
pubmed: 32091404
EuroIntervention. 2019 Jun 20;15(2):147-154
pubmed: 30777842
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020 Sep;21(9):1086-1090
pubmed: 32046925
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Oct;8(12):1595-604
pubmed: 26386766
Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2006 Mar;98(3):253-9
pubmed: 16611199
Stat Med. 1998 Oct 15;17(19):2265-81
pubmed: 9802183
EuroIntervention. 2018 Feb 02;13(15):e1764-e1770
pubmed: 29131801
Circulation. 2017 Mar 21;135(12):1123-1132
pubmed: 28104716
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Jan;13(1):e008227
pubmed: 31937138
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2017 Mar;18(2):145-150
pubmed: 27887905
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Nov 26;11(22):2326-2334
pubmed: 30466832
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Feb;11(2):e005206
pubmed: 29444998
EuroIntervention. 2016 May 17;12(1):88-93
pubmed: 27173868