Advertisement

Access Management for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

  • Francesco BurzottaEmail author
  • Osama Shoeib
  • Carlo Trani
Chapter

Abstract

Transfemoral aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the most commonly adopted access for TAVI, as vascular injury and complication remain a concern that affects both procedural and clinical outcomes, so meticulous access site selection and preparation, perfect femoral stick, and early complication diagnosis and good management will markedly improve patient’s outcome.

In this chapter, we discuss planning and choice of the vascular access by evaluating the anatomical features of the femoral artery; we highlight the methods of femoral artery access either percutaneously or surgically. Good planning and following best practice for vascular access will reduce the vascular complications.

Predictors and incidence of vascular complication and how they affect the clinical outcome are also discussed; different types of vascular complication and their management are also illustrated.

Keywords

Transfemoral aortic valve implantation TAVI TAVR Vascular access Vascular complication 

Notes

Disclosures

Dr. Burzotta discloses to have been involved in advisory board meetings or having received speaker’s fees from Medtronic, St Jude Medical, Abiomed, Biotronic. Dr. Trani discloses to have been involved in advisory board meetings or having received speaker’s fees from St Jude Medical, Abiomed, Biotronic.

References

  1. 1.
    Dato I, Burzotta F, Trani C, Crea F, Ussia GP. Percutaneous management of vascular access in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. World J Cardiol. 2014;6:836–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Irani F, Kumar S, Colyer WR Jr. Common femoral artery access techniques: a review. J Cardiovasc Med. 2009;10:517–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lechner G, Jantsch H, Waneck R, Kretschmer G. The relationship between the common femoral artery, the inguinal crease, and the inguinal ligament: a guide to accurate angiographic puncture. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1988;11:165–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grier D, Hartnell G. Percutaneous femoral artery puncture: practice and anatomy. Br J Radiol. 1990;63:602–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson LW, Krone R. Cardiac catheterization 1991: a report of the Registry of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions (SCA&I). Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn. 1993;28:219–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sandgren T, Sonesson B, Ahlgren R, Lanne T. The diameter of the common femoral artery in healthy human: influence of sex, age, and body size. J Vasc Surg. 1999;29:503–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ahn HY, Lee HJ, Lee HJ, Yang JH, Yi JS, Lee IW. Assessment of the optimal site of femoral artery puncture and angiographic anatomical study of the common femoral artery. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2014;56:91–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Altin RS, Flicker S, Naidech HJ. Pseudoaneurysm and arteriovenous fistula after femoral artery catheterization: association with low femoral punctures. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989;152:629–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cole PL, Krone RJ. Approach to reduction of vascular complications of percutaneous valvuloplasty. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn. 1987;13:331–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Raphael M, Hartnell G. Femoral artery catheterization and retroperitoneal haematoma formation. Clin Radiol. 2001;56:933–4; author reply 934–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gabriel M, Pawlaczyk K, Waliszewski K, Krasinski Z, Majewski W. Location of femoral artery puncture site and the risk of postcatheterization pseudoaneurysm formation. Int J Cardiol. 2007;120:167–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim D, Orron DE, Skillman JJ, et al. Role of superficial femoral artery puncture in the development of pseudoaneurysm and arteriovenous fistula complicating percutaneous transfemoral cardiac catheterization. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn. 1992;25:91–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Olasinska-Wisniewska A, Grygier M, Lesiak M, et al. Femoral artery anatomy-tailored approach in transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Adv Interv Cardiol. 2017;13:150–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krajcer Z, Parekh D. Dynamic sheaths, in the nick of time or past their prime? Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88:1153–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abu Saleh WK, Tang GH, Ahmad H, et al. Vascular complication can be minimized with a balloon-expandable, re-collapsible sheath in TAVR with a self-expanding bioprosthesis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88:135–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Koehler T, Buege M, Schleiting H, Seyfarth M, Tiroch K, Vorpahl M. Changes of the eSheath outer dimensions used for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:572681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hilling-Smith R, Cockburn J, Dooley M, et al. Rapid pacing using the 0.035-in. Retrograde left ventricular support wire in 208 cases of transcatheter aortic valve implantation and balloon aortic valvuloplasty. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;89:783–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harrison GJ, How TV, Vallabhaneni SR, et al. Guidewire stiffness: what’s in a name? J Endovasc Ther. 2011;18:797–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Haas PC, Krajcer Z, Diethrich EB. Closure of large percutaneous access sites using the Prostar XL Percutaneous Vascular Surgery device. J Endovasc Surg. 1999;6:168–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Burzotta F, Paloscia L, Trani C, et al. Feasibility and long-term safety of elective Impella-assisted high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: a pilot two-centre study. J Cardiovasc Med. 2008;9:1004–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Krajcer Z, Howell M. A novel technique using the percutaneous vascular surgery device to close the 22 French femoral artery entry site used for percutaneous abdominal aortic aneurysm exclusion. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2000;50:356–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee WA, Brown MP, Nelson PR, Huber TS, Seeger JM. Midterm outcomes of femoral arteries after percutaneous endovascular aortic repair using the Preclose technique. J Vasc Surg. 2008;47:919–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ott I, Shivaraju A, Schaffer NR, et al. Parallel suture technique with ProGlide: a novel method for management of vascular access during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). EuroIntervention. 2017;13:928–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Maniotis C, Andreou C, Karalis I, Koutouzi G, Agelaki M, Koutouzis M. A systematic review on the safety of Prostar XL versus ProGlide after TAVR and EVAR. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2017;18:145–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Spitzer SG, Wilbring M, Alexiou K, Stumpf J, Kappert U, Matschke K. Surgical cut-down or percutaneous access-which is best for less vascular access complications in transfemoral TAVI? Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88:E52–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Garcia E, Martin-Hernandez P, Unzue L, Hernandez-Antolin RA, Almeria C, Cuadrado A. Usefulness of placing a wire from the contralateral femoral artery to improve the percutaneous treatment of vascular complications in TAVI. Revista Esp Cardiol. 2014;67:410–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Van Mieghem NM, Tchetche D, Chieffo A, et al. Incidence, predictors, and implications of access site complications with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am J Cardiol. 2012;110:1361–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shoeib O, Burzotta F. Percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve replacement induces femoral artery shrinkage: angiographic evidence and predictors for a new side effect. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;91:938–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Malyar NM, Kaier K, Freisinger E, et al. Prevalence and impact of critical limb ischaemia on in-hospital outcome in transcatheter aortic valve implantation in Germany. EuroIntervention. 2017;13:1281–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Blakeslee-Carter J, Dexter D, Mahoney P, et al. A novel iliac morphology score predicts procedural mortality and major vascular complications in transfemoral aortic valve replacement. Ann Vasc Surg. 2018;46:208–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Torsello GB, Kasprzak B, Klenk E, Tessarek J, Osada N, Torsello GF. Endovascular suture versus cutdown for endovascular aneurysm repair: a prospective randomized pilot study. J Vasc Surg. 2003;38:78–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stortecky S, Wenaweser P, Diehm N, et al. Percutaneous management of vascular complications in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:515–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vidi VD, Matheny ME, Govindarajulu US, et al. Vascular closure device failure in contemporary practice. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:837–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hayashida K, Lefevre T, Chevalier B, et al. True percutaneous approach for transfemoral aortic valve implantation using the Prostar XL device: impact of learning curve on vascular complications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:207–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stone PA, Campbell JE, AbuRahma AF. Femoral pseudoaneurysms after percutaneous access. J Vasc Surg. 2014;60:1359–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stone PA, Martinez M, Thompson SN, et al. Ten-year experience of vascular surgeon management of iatrogenic pseudoaneurysms: do anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet medications matter? Ann Vasc Surg. 2016;30:45–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mlekusch W, Haumer M, Mlekusch I, et al. Prediction of iatrogenic pseudoaneurysm after percutaneous endovascular procedures. Radiology. 2006;240:597–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kent KC, McArdle CR, Kennedy B, Baim DS, Anninos E, Skillman JJ. Accuracy of clinical examination in the evaluation of femoral false aneurysm and arteriovenous fistula. Cardiovasc Surg. 1993;1:504–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hanson JM, Atri M, Power N. Ultrasound-guided thrombin injection of iatrogenic groin pseudoaneurysm: Doppler features and technical tips. Br J Radiol. 2008;81:154–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Paulson EK, Hertzberg BS, Paine SS, Carroll BA. Femoral artery pseudoaneurysms: value of color Doppler sonography in predicting which ones will thrombose without treatment. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992;159:1077–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Samuels D, Orron DE, Kessler A, et al. Femoral artery pseudoaneurysm: Doppler sonographic features predictive for spontaneous thrombosis. J Clin Ultrasound. 1997;25:497–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fellmeth BD, Roberts AC, Bookstein JJ, et al. Postangiographic femoral artery injuries: nonsurgical repair with US-guided compression. Radiology. 1991;178:671–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Khoury M, Rebecca A, Greene K, et al. Duplex scanning-guided thrombin injection for the treatment of iatrogenic pseudoaneurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2002;35:517–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Stone P, Lohan JA, Copeland SE, Hamrick RE Jr, Tiley EH 3rd, Flaherty SK. Iatrogenic pseudoaneurysms: comparison of treatment modalities, including duplex-guided thrombin injection. W V Med J. 2003;99:230–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lonn L, Olmarker A, Geterud K, Risberg B. Prospective randomized study comparing ultrasound-guided thrombin injection to compression in the treatment of femoral pseudoaneurysms. J Endovasc Ther. 2004;11:570–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Dzijan-Horn M, Langwieser N, Groha P, et al. Safety and efficacy of a potential treatment algorithm by using manual compression repair and ultrasound-guided thrombin injection for the management of iatrogenic femoral artery pseudoaneurysm in a large patient cohort. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:207–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Masson JB, Al Bugami S, Webb JG. Endovascular balloon occlusion for catheter-induced large artery perforation in the catheterization laboratory. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;73:514–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lagana D, Carrafiello G, Mangini M, et al. Emergency percutaneous treatment of arterial iliac axis ruptures. Emerg Radiol. 2007;14:173–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Goltz JP, Basturk P, Hoppe H, Triller J, Kickuth R. Emergency and elective implantation of covered stent systems in iatrogenic arterial injuries. RoFo. 2011;183:618–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Masson JB, Kovac J, Schuler G, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: review of the nature, management, and avoidance of procedural complications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:811–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hayashida K, Lefevre T, Chevalier B, et al. Transfemoral aortic valve implantation new criteria to predict vascular complications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:851–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Van Mieghem NM, Nuis RJ, Piazza N, et al. Vascular complications with transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the 18 Fr Medtronic CoreValve System: the Rotterdam experience. EuroIntervention. 2010;5:673–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ducrocq G, Francis F, Serfaty JM, et al. Vascular complications of transfemoral aortic valve implantation with the Edwards SAPIEN prosthesis: incidence and impact on outcome. EuroIntervention. 2010;5:666–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Généreux P, Webb JG, Svensson LG, et al. Vascular complications after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1043–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Czerwinska-Jelonkiewicz K, Michalowska I, Witkowski A, et al. Vascular complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): risk and long-term results. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2014;37:490–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mwipatayi BP, Picardo A, Masilonyane-Jones TV, et al. Incidence and prognosis of vascular complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Vasc Surg. 2013;58:1028–36.e1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Steinvil A, Leshem-Rubinow E, Halkin A, et al. Vascular complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation and their association with mortality reevaluated by the valve academic research consortium definitions. Am J Cardiol. 2015;115:100–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Perrin N, Ellenberger C, Licker M, et al. Management of vascular complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2015;108:491–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Uguz E, Gokcimen M, Ali S, et al. Predictability and outcome of vascular complications after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Heart Valve Dis. 2016;25:173–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Okuyama K, Jilaihawi H, Abramowitz Y, et al. The clinical impact of vascular complications as defined by VARC-1 vs. VARC-2 in patients following transcatheter aortic valve implantation. EuroIntervention. 2016;12:e636–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Sinning JM, Horack M, Grube E, et al. The impact of peripheral arterial disease on early outcome after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: results from the German Transcatheter Aortic Valve Interventions Registry. Am Heart J. 2012;164:102–10.e1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kim BG, Ko YG, Hong S-J, Ahn C-M, Kim JS, Kim B-K, Choi D, Jang Y, Hong MK, Lee SH, Lee S, Chang B-C. Impact of peripheral artery disease on early and late outcomes in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation CCT. Int J Cardiol. 2018;255:206–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Fanaroff AC, Manandhar P, Holmes DR, et al. Peripheral artery disease and transcatheter aortic valve replacement outcomes: a report from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Therapy Registry. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10:e005456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Cardiology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCSUniversità Cattolica del Sacro CuoreRomeItaly
  2. 2.Cardiology DepartmentTanta UniversityTantaEgypt

Personalised recommendations