Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: How Minimalistic Can We Become?

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become a well-established intervention with reproducible and excellent early and mid-term outcomes. A minimalist approach to TAVI is already the standard of care in many experienced centers. In this report, we share our experience and opinions on how we can further simplify the TAVI procedure in hope to establish the best possible outcomes.

Comparison of Transradial vs Transfemoral Access for Aortoiliac and Femoropopliteal Interventions: A Single-Center Experience.

PURPOSE: To compare the procedure and safety outcomes of the transradial approach (TRA) with the femoral approach (FA) for treating aortoiliac and femoropopliteal stenoses and occlusions. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was conducted involving 188 patients (mean age 66.4±10.8 years; 116 men) with lower limb claudication or critical limb ischemia who underwent aortoiliac (131, 62.4%) or femoropopliteal (79, 37.6%) interventions on 210 lesions over a 3-year period. Operator discretion determined TRA suitability; exclusions included Raynaud's disease, upper limb occlusive disease, previous TRA difficulties, or planned hemodialysis. Lesion characteristics, clinical endpoints, and access site complications were compared. RESULTS: FA was used primarily in 123 patients and the TRA (12 left and 53 right radial arteries) in 65 procedures. Eleven (16.9%) TRAs failed vs 9 (7.3%) FAs (p=0.42). Crossover to FA was due to occlusive lesions requiring alternative equipment in 9 cases and to tortuosity of the aortic arch vessels in 2 patients. The 134 FA interventions (balloon angioplasty, stents) were retrograde (112, 83.6%) or antegrade (22, 16.4%). There were significantly more TASC C/D lesions in the FA group (p=0.02). Sheath sizes (5-F to 8-F) did not differ between groups, and no significant differences were found between FA vs TRA in terms of procedure time (50.0±28.9 vs 46.8±25.1 minutes, p=0.50) or length of stay (2.2±0.6 vs 2.1±0.3 days, p=0.24). While there were no strokes, access site complications occurred in 6.0% of the FA patients vs 3.7% of the TRA patients (p=0.12). CONCLUSION: The transradial approach for aortoiliac and femoropopliteal interventions is safe and efficacious compared with the transfemoral approach for a range of lesion subtypes. Nevertheless, there remains a need for improvements in peripheral device and catheter technology to decrease transradial failure rates.

Contemporary Approach to Coronary Bifurcation Lesion Treatment.

Coronary bifurcations are frequent and account for approximately 20% of all percutaneous coronary interventions. Nonetheless, they remain one of the most challenging lesion subsets in interventional cardiology in terms of a lower procedural success rate and increased rates of long-term adverse cardiac events. Provisional side branch stenting should be the default approach in the majority of cases and we propose easily applicable and reproducible stepwise techniques associated with low risk of failure and complications.