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.

Elderly woman presenting with multivessel coronary artery disease and Takotsubo syndrome.

Takotsubo syndrome is an acute and often reversible condition, with initial presentation mimicking acute coronary syndrome. Typically, patients present with left ventricular regional wall motion abnormalities, without a corresponding coronary artery obstruction on angiography. Coexistence of a coronary artery disease is possible and may render the distinction between the two entities particularly challenging. We report the case of a 94-year-old woman with chest pain after an emotional upset and acute myocardial injury. Transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) revealed a severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) with apical ballooning. Coronary angiogram showed significant stenosis of the distal left main coronary artery and of the mid-left anterior descending artery, as well as a 30%-50% stenosis of the mid-distal right coronary artery. Revascularisation was deferred and antiplatelet as well as heart failure therapy begun. A repeat TTE 6 days later revealed a quasi-normalised LVEF. Ultimately, percutaneous coronary revascularisation of the left main and left anterior descending artery was performed, with favourable outcome at 6-month follow-up.

Current decision making and short-term outcome in patients with degenerative aortic stenosis: the Pooled-RotterdAm-Milano-Toulouse In Collaboration Aortic Stenosis survey.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to provide a real-world snapshot of contemporary Heart Team decision making on patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and the consequent short-term clinical outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was an international multicentre prospective registry encompassing 390 patients with symptomatic severe AS who were prospectively enrolled. Clinical endpoints and the decisive arguments to opt for surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement, or medical therapy were recorded separately. The mean age was 76.4±11.6 years, 55% were male and the STS score was 2.9% (IQR 1.6-6.9). The local Heart Teams considered 43%, 25% and 23% to be at low, intermediate and high operative risk with a calculated STS score of 2.18±1.72, 5.08±2.76 and 13.15±9.43, respectively. Overall, 7% were deemed inoperable. Ninety-four percent of patients at low operative risk were sent for SAVR whereas 64% and 92% of intermediate and high-risk patients underwent TAVI. Only 6% of patients did not receive any kind of aortic valve replacement. Overall, 30-day all-cause mortality was 2.8%. TAVI was associated with more major vascular complications, need for permanent pacemakers and post-procedural aortic regurgitation. SAVR had more life-threatening bleedings and new-onset atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: The PRAGMATIC AS survey offers a snapshot of the contemporary management of patients with symptomatic severe AS. Multidisciplinary Heart Teams select an optimal strategy based on age, frailty and comorbidities. Nearly half of all patients are sent for TAVI. Only a small minority of patients will not receive valve replacement therapy.