Utility of Suprasternal Transinnominate Artery for Alternate Access in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

OBJECTIVE: Despite advancements in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) technology, alternate access strategies are still required when transfemoral access is unsuitable. In these often anatomically complex group of patients, we sought to evaluate the safety and feasibility of suprasternal transinnominate (TI) artery access for TAVR. METHODS: At our institution, 652 patients underwent TAVR from November 2011 through February 2020. Of these, 23 patients underwent TI TAVR via a 5-cm suprasternal incision without special instrumentation. Outcomes of interest were technical considerations, postoperative complications, and perioperative recovery in relation to established access strategies. RESULTS: The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 8.6 ± 4.2 and the average age was 75 ± 8. All patients underwent TI TAVR using a self-expanding (12), or balloon-expandable (11) transcatheter heart valve. Average postoperative stay was 2 ± 0.7 days (range 2 to 4) with most 20/23 (87%) being discharged to home. There was no 30-day mortality or readmission. There was 1 access-site complication and 1 cerebrovascular accident within 30 days, both intraoperative, with excellent recovery. All patients had either trivial (19) or mild (4) aortic regurgitation on 30-day echocardiography. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR via suprasternal TI access is feasible, safe, provides satisfactory perioperative recovery and adds to the options when patients require alternate access. Further data would be optimal to validate this single-center experience.

Vascular responses to the multiple overlapped paclitaxel-eluting stents for the treatment of bare-metal in-stent restenotic lesions: angiographic and intravascular ultrasound analysis from the TAXUS-V ISR trial.

BACKGROUND: Although effective coverage of coronary diffuse in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions has warranted the use of multiple drug-eluting stents, the vessel response to paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) overlap is not fully understood. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In the TAXUS-V ISR, i.e., comparing PES versus brachytherapy for the treatment of bare-metal ISR, angiographic analyses at 9-month follow-up were available in 184 ISR lesions treated with PES. RESULTS: In-stent late loss in entire stented segment of multiple PES (n=50) was 0.45+/-0.48 mm, whereas that of single PES (n=134) was 0.3+/-0.47 mm, P=.06. No aneurysm was observed at overlapping PES segments at 9 months. Stent thrombosis up to 9 months was observed in one in each group (single PES, 0.7% vs. multiple PES, 1.8%; P=.47). In a subset of 30 patients, volumetric intravascular ultrasound analysis demonstrated that in-stent net volume obstruction was 12.3+/-12.4 in single PES (n=20) and 14.9+/-9.8 in multiple PES (n=10), P=.60. The changes of vessel and lumen at the overlapping PES segment were similar to those of the adjacent 5-mm segments (Deltaminimum lumen area, mm(2): -1.2+/-1.0, -1.1+/-1.1, -0.8+/-0.9, P=.48; Deltavessel volume, mm(3)/mm: -0.2+/-1.4, 0.1+/-1.7, 0.3+/-1.3, P=.37; proximal, overlap, distal segment, respectively). There was no late incomplete stent apposition at overlapping PES segments. CONCLUSIONS: No in vivo evidence of adverse local vessel response at the site of overlapping PES for the treatment of bare-metal ISR has been demonstrated.

Two-year clinical outcomes after paclitaxel-eluting stent or brachytherapy treatment for bare metal stent restenosis: the TAXUS V ISR trial.

AIMS: This study sought to investigate the 2-year outcomes of patients treated with the paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS((R)) stent (PES) or vascular brachytherapy (VBT), the previous 'gold standard therapy', for bare metal stent in-stent restenosis (ISR). METHODS AND RESULTS: In the TAXUS V-ISR trial, 396 patients with bare metal stent ISR referred for percutaneous coronary intervention were prospectively randomized to either PES or beta source VBT. The present analysis reports 24-month clinical outcomes from that study. Between 9 and 24 months, ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularization tended to be required less frequently with assignment to PES compared to VBT (5.3 vs. 10.3%, P = .07). As a result, ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 24 months was significantly reduced with PES compared with VBT (10.1 vs. 21.6%, P = 0.003), as was ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularization (18.1 vs. 27.5%, P = .03). There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel thrombosis either between 12 and 24 months, or cumulative to 24 months. CONCLUSION: Freedom from clinical restenosis at 2 years is significantly enhanced after PES placement compared with VBT for bare metal stent ISR, with similar rates of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel thrombosis.

Paclitaxel-eluting stents vs vascular brachytherapy for in-stent restenosis within bare-metal stents: the TAXUS V ISR randomized trial.

CONTEXT: Restenosis within bare-metal stents is often treated with repeat percutaneous coronary intervention, although subsequent recurrence rates are high, with vascular brachytherapy (VBT) affording the best results. The effectiveness of drug-eluting stents in this setting has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of the polymer-based, slow-release paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with restenotic lesions after prior stent implantation in native coronary arteries. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Prospective, multicenter, randomized trial conducted between June 6, 2003, and July 16, 2004, at 37 North American academic and community-based institutions in 396 patients with in-stent restenosis of a previously implanted bare-metal coronary stent (vessel diameter, 2.5-3.75 mm; lesion length, < or =46 mm). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to undergo angioplasty followed by VBT with a beta source (n = 201) or paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation (n = 195). Clinical and angiographic follow-up at 9 months was scheduled in all patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization at 9 months. RESULTS: Diabetes mellitus was present in 139 patients (35.1%). Median reference vessel diameter was 2.65 mm and median lesion length was 15.3 mm. In the VBT group, new stents were implanted in 22 patients (10.9%) and in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group, multiple stents were required in 57 patients (29.2%), with median stent length of 24 mm. Follow-up at 9 months was complete in 194 patients in the VBT group and 191 patients in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group (96.5% and 97.9%, respectively). For VBT and paclitaxel-eluting stents, respectively, the number of events and 9-month rates for ischemic target lesion revascularization were 27 (13.9%) vs 12 (6.3%) (relative risk [RR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-0.86; P = .01); for ischemic target vessel revascularization, 34 (17.5%) vs 20 (10.5%) (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.36-1.00; P = .046); and for overall major adverse cardiac events, 39 (20.1%) vs 22 (11.5%) (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.35-0.93; P = .02), with similar rates of cardiac death or myocardial infarction (10 [5.2%] vs 7 [3.7%]; RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.28-1.83; P = .48) and target vessel thrombosis (5 [2.6%] vs 3 [1.6%]; RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.15-2.50; P = .72). Angiographic restenosis at 9 months was 31.2% (53 of 170 patients) with VBT and 14.5% (25 of 172 patients) with paclitaxel-eluting stents (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30-0.71; P<.001). CONCLUSION: Treatment of bare-metal in-stent restenotic lesions with paclitaxel-eluting stents rather than angioplasty followed by VBT reduces clinical and angiographic restenosis at 9 months and improves event-free survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00287573.