Salta alla navigazione principale Salta alla ricerca Salta al contenuto principale

Comparison of ultrasound- versus fluoroscopy-guidEd femorAl access In tranS-catheter aortic valve replacement In the Era of contempoRary devices: The EASIER registry

  • Emiliano Bianchini
  • , Alberto Morello
  • , Michele Bellamoli
  • , Enrico Romagnoli
  • , Cristina Aurigemma
  • , Marco Tagliaferri
  • , Carolina Montonati
  • , Nicolas Dumonteil
  • , Michele Cimmino
  • , Emmanuel Villa
  • , Nicola Corcione
  • , Luca Bettari
  • , Antonio Messina
  • , Alessio Stanzione
  • , Giovanni Troise
  • , Donata Mor
  • , Donata Angela Mor
  • , Antonio Maggi
  • , Raffaello Bellosta
  • , Matteo Alberto Pegorer
  • Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai, Alfonso Ielasi, Francesco Burzotta, Carlo Trani, Diego Maffeo, Didier Tchétché, Andrea Buono, Arturo Giordano
  • Pineta Grande Hospital
  • Fondazione Poliambulanza Hospital
  • IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi - Milano
  • Clinique Pasteur Toulouse
  • Hospital Institute Fondazione Poliambulanza
  • University of Rome La Sapienza

Risultato della ricerca: Contributo in rivistaArticolo

Abstract

Background: Vascular complications (VCs) still represent one of the principal concerns of trans-femoral trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR). New-generation devices can minimize such complications but the arterial access management is left to the operator's choice. This study aims to describe the rate of VCs in a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices and to determine whether an ultrasound-guided (USG) vs. a fluoroscopy-guided (FG) femoral access management has an impact on their prevention. Methods: This is a prospective, observational, multicenter study. Consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices were analyzed from January 2022 to October 2022 in five tertiary care centers. Femoral accesses were managed according to the operator's preferences. All the patients underwent a pre-discharge peripheral ultrasound control. VCs and bleedings were the main endpoints of interest. Results: A total of 458 consecutive patients were enrolled (274 in the USG group and 184 in the FG group). VCs occurred in 6.5 % of the patients (5.2 % minor and 1.3 % major). There was no difference between the USG and the FG groups in terms of any VCs (7.3 % vs. 5.4 %; p = 0.4), or any VARC-3 bleedings (6.9 % vs 6 %, p = 0.9). At logistic regression analysis, the two guidance strategies did not result as predictors of VCs (odds Ratio 0.8, 95 % Confidence Interval 0.46-1.4; P = 0.4). Conclusions: In a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices, the occurrence of VCs is low and mostly represented by minor VCs. USG and FG modalities did not affect the rate of VCs.
Lingua originaleInglese
pagine (da-a)40-47
Numero di pagine8
RivistaCardiovascular Revascularization Medicine
DOI
Stato di pubblicazionePubblicato - 2024

Keywords

  • Femoral access management
  • Fluoroscopy
  • Puncture guidance
  • TAVR
  • Ultrasound
  • Vascular complication

Fingerprint

Entra nei temi di ricerca di 'Comparison of ultrasound- versus fluoroscopy-guidEd femorAl access In tranS-catheter aortic valve replacement In the Era of contempoRary devices: The EASIER registry'. Insieme formano una fingerprint unica.

Cita questo