Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 147
Filtrar
1.
Clin Res Cardiol ; 2020 Apr 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32335689

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are no recommendations regarding the minimum duration of in-hospital monitoring after transfemoral (TF) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and practices are extremely heterogeneous. We, therefore, aimed to evaluate length of stay (LOS) and predictive factors for late discharge after TF TAVR using data from the FRANCE TAVI registry. METHODS: TAVR was performed in 12,804 patients in 48 French centers between 2013 and 2015. LOS was evaluated in 5857 TF patients discharged home. LOS was calculated from TAVR procedure (day 0) to discharge. The study population was divided into three groups based on LOS values. Patients discharged within 3 days constituted the "very early" discharge group, patients with a LOS between 3 and 6 days constituted the "early" discharge group, and patients with a length of stay > 6 days constituted the "late" discharge group. RESULTS: The median LOS was 7 (5-9) days and was extremely variable among centers. The proportion of patients discharged very early, early, and late was 4.4% (n = 256), 33.7% (n = 1997), and 61.9% (n = 3624) respectively. Variables associated with late discharge were female sex, co-morbidities, major complications, self-expandable valve, general anesthesia, and a significant center effect. In contrast, history of previous pacemaker was a protective factor. The composite of death and re-admission in the very early and early versus late discharge groups was similar at 30 days (3.3% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: LOS is extremely variable after TF TAVR in France. Co-morbidities and complications were predictive factors of late discharge after TAVI. Interestingly, the use of self-expandable prosthesis and general anesthesia may also contribute to late discharge. Our results confirm that early discharge is safe.

3.
EuroIntervention ; 2020 04 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32310129

RESUMO

AIMS: No randomized study comparing the outcomes of transcarotid (TC) and transaxillary (TAx) TAVR has been conducted to date. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 2010 to 2018, a French multicenter prospective registry included 502 patients with n=374 undergoing TC-TAVR and n=128 TAx-TAVR for symptomatic aortic stenosis. Patients treated through TAx access were matched 1:2 to patients treated through TC route by using propensity score (20 clinical, anatomical and procedural variables) and by date of the procedure. The first outcome was the mortality at 1-month follow-up. The second outcome was 1-month stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA). In matched-propensity analyses, the incidence of the primary outcome was similar in TAx and TC group (TAx 5.5% vs. TC 4.5%; OR=1.23; 95%CI:0.40-3.70). The secondary outcome was similar in TAx (3.2%) and TC (6.8%; OR=0.52; 95%CI:0.14-1.84). Minor bleeding (2.7% vs. 9.3%; OR=0.26; 95%CI:0.07-0.92) and main access hematoma (3.6% vs. 10.3%; OR=0.034; 95% CI:0.09-0.92) were significantly more frequent with the TC access. One-month clinical efficacy and safety and 1-year mortality did not differed according to different routes. CONCLUSIONS: One-month mortality, 1-month stroke/TIA and 1-year mortality are similar with TAx and TC TAVR. However TC-TAVR is accompanied by more minor bleeding and main access hematoma compared with the transaxillary route.

4.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 9(6): e014916, 2020 Mar 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32172643

RESUMO

Background Ultrasound (US) guidance provides the unique opportunity to control the puncture zone of the artery during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement and may decrease major vascular complications (VC) and life-threatening or major bleeding complications. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of US guidance using a propensity score-matched comparison. Methods and Results US guidance was implemented as the default approach for all transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement cases in our institution in June 2013. We defined 3 groups of consecutive patients according to the method of puncture (fluoroscopic/US guidance) and the use of a transcatheter heart valve. Patients in the US-guided second-generation group (Sapien XT [Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA], Corevalve [Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland]) were successfully 1:1 matched with patients in the fluoroscope-guided second-generation group (n=95) with propensity score matching. In a second analysis we described the consecutive patients of the US-guided third-generation group (Evolut-R [Medtronic], Sapien 3 [Edwards Lifesciences], n=308). All vascular and bleeding complications were reduced in the US-guided second-generation group compared with the fluoroscope-guided second-generation group: VC (16.8% versus 6.3%; P=0.023); life-threatening or major bleeding (22.1% versus 6%; P=0.004); and VC related to vascular access (12.6% versus 4.2%; P=0.052). In the US-guided third-generation group the rates of major VC and life-threatening or major bleeding were 3.2% (95% CI, 1.6% to 5.9%) and 3.6% (95% CI, 1.8% to 6.3%). In the overall population (n=546), life-threatening or major bleeding was associated with a 1.7-fold increased mortality risk (P=0.02). Conclusions We demonstrated that US guidance effectively reduced VC and bleeding complications for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement and should be considered the standard puncture method. Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02628509.

7.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31943717

RESUMO

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Clinicians use validated scores to risk-stratify patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, evaluation by the Heart Team often deems patients to be at higher risk than their formal scores suggest. We sought to assess clinical outcomes of TAVR patients defined as high-risk by the Heart Team's assessment versus the patient's logistic EuroSCORE (LES). METHODS: The BRAVO-3 trial randomized patients at high risk (LES ≥ 18, or deemed inoperable by the Heart Team) to TAVR with periprocedural anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin versus bivalirudin. Endpoints included net adverse cardiac events (NACE: the composite of all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, or bleeding), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: death, MI, or stroke), the individual components of MACE, major vascular complications, BARC ≥ 3b bleeding and VARC life-threatening bleeding at 30 days. We compared patients deemed high-risk based on LES ≥ 18 versus high-risk by the Heart Team despite lower LES. RESULTS: A total of 467/800 (58.4%) patients were deemed high-risk by the Heart Team despite LES < 18. After multivariable analysis, there were no differences in the odds of endpoints between groups (NACE, ORLES≥18 : 1.32, 95% CI 0.86-2.02, p = .21; MACE, ORLES≥18 : 1.27, 95% CI 0.72-2.25, p = .41; major vascular complications, ORLES≥18 : 0.97, 95% CI 0.65-1.44, p = .88; BARC ≥3b, ORLES≥18 : 1.38, 95% CI 0.82-2.33, p = .23; and VARC life-threatening bleeding, ORLES≥18 : 0.99, 95% CI 0.69-1.41, p = .95). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing TAVR and labeled high-risk by LES ≥ 18 or Heart Team assessment despite LES < 18 have comparable short-term outcomes. Assignment of high-risk status to over 50% of patients is attributable to Heart Team's clinical assessment.

8.
JAMA Cardiol ; 2020 Jan 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31913433

RESUMO

Importance: Approximately one-third of patients considered for coronary revascularization have diabetes, which is a major determinant of clinical outcomes, often influencing the choice of the revascularization strategy. The usefulness of fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide treatment in this population is understudied and has been questioned. Objective: To evaluate the usefulness and rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) of integrating FFR in management decisions for patients with diabetes who undergo coronary angiography. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the PRIME-FFR study derived from the merger of the POST-IT study (Portuguese Study on the Evaluation of FFR-Guided Treatment of Coronary Disease [March 2012-November 2013]) and R3F study (French Study of FFR Integrated Multicenter Registries Implementation of FFR in Routine Practice [October 2008-June 2010]), 2 prospective multicenter registries that shared a common design. A population of all-comers for whom angiography disclosed ambiguous lesions was analyzed for rates, patterns, and outcomes associated with management reclassification, including revascularization deferral, in patients with vs without diabetes. Data analysis was performed from June to August 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization (MACE) at 1 year. Results: Among 1983 patients (1503 [77%] male; mean [SD] age, 65 [10] years), 701 had diabetes, and FFR was performed for 1.4 lesions per patient (58.2% of lesions in the left anterior descending artery; mean [SD] stenosis, 56% [11%]; mean [SD] FFR, 0.81 [0.01]). Reclassification by FFR was high and similar in patients with and without diabetes (41.2% vs 37.5%, P = .13), but reclassification from medical treatment to revascularization was more frequent in the former (142 of 342 [41.5%] vs 230 of 730 [31.5%], P = .001). There was no statistical difference between the 1-year rates of MACE in reclassified (9.7%) and nonreclassified patients (12.0%) (P = .37). Among patients with diabetes, FFR-based deferral identified patients with a lower risk of MACE at 12 months (25 of 296 [8.4%]) compared with those undergoing revascularization (47 of 257 [13.1%]) (P = .04), and the rate was of the same magnitude of the observed rate among deferred patients without diabetes (7.9%, P = .87). Status of insulin treatment had no association with outcomes. Patients (6.6% of the population) in whom FFR was disregarded had the highest MACE rates regardless of diabetes status. Conclusions and Relevance: Routine integration of FFR for the management of coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes may be associated with a high rate of treatment reclassification. Management strategies guided by FFR, including revascularization deferral, may be useful for patients with diabetes.

10.
Circulation ; 141(4): 243-259, 2020 Jan 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31736356

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: No randomized study powered to compare balloon expandable (BE) with self expanding (SE) transcatheter heart valves (THVs) on individual end points after transcatheter aortic valve replacement has been conducted to date. METHODS: From January 2013 to December 2015, the FRANCE-TAVI nationwide registry (Registry of Aortic Valve Bioprostheses Established by Catheter) included 12 141 patients undergoing BE-THV (Edwards, n=8038) or SE-THV (Medtronic, n=4103) for treatment of native aortic stenosis. Long term mortality status was available in all patients (median 20 months; interquartile range, 14 to 30). Patients treated with BE-THV (n=3910) were successfully matched 1:1 with 3910 patients treated with SE-THV by using propensity score (25 clinical, anatomical, and procedural variables) and by date of the procedure (within 3 months). The first coprimary outcome was ≥ moderate occurrence of paravalvular regurgitation or in-hospital mortality, or both. The second coprimary outcome was 2-year all-cause mortality. RESULTS: In propensity-matched analyses, the incidence of the first coprimary outcome was higher with SE-THV (19.8%) compared with BE-THV (11.9%; relative risk, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.46-1.91]; P<0.0001). Each component of the outcome was also higher in patients receiving SE-THV: ≥ moderate paravalvular regurgitation (15.5% versus 8.3%; relative risk, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.63-2.22]; P<0.0001) and in hospital mortality (5.6% versus 4.2%; relative risk, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.07-1.66]; P=0.01). During follow up, all cause mortality occurred in 899 patients treated with SE-THV (2-year mortality, 29.8%) and in 801 patients treated with BE-THV (2-year mortality, 26.6%; hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.06-1.29]; P=0.003). Similar results were found using inverse probability of treatment weighting using propensity score analysis. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that use of SE-THV was associated with a higher risk of paravalvular regurgitation and higher in-hospital and 2-year mortality compared with use of BE-THV. These data strongly support the need for a randomized trial sufficiently powered to compare the latest generation of SE-THV and BE-THV. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01777828.

11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31794159

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The SAPIEN 3 (S3) addresses several limitations of the SAPIEN XT (SXT) for the performance of transfemoral (TF-) balloon expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine whether their altered features translate into improved outcomes in a real-world TF-TAVI patient population. METHODS: Data for 3,314 patients were extracted from the European registries SOURCE-XT and SOURCE-3. Patients were propensity-score (PS) matched (n = 1,169/group). RESULTS: In the PS matched comparison, device success was higher in the S3 (99.2%) compared to the SXT group (98.2%; p = .04). S3 patients experienced a lower rate of procedural death (0.7 vs. 2.6%; p = .0004), moderate/severe paravalvular leakage (PVL; 1.4 vs. 5.5%; p < .0001), and procedure-related stroke (1.2 vs. 2.4%; p = .04) while higher rates of mean aortic valve gradients ≥20 mmHg, and new permanent pacemaker implantations were seen. At 30 days a lower rate of all-cause mortality was seen (2.1% vs. 4.3%; p = .003), which was preserved after 1 year (10.7% vs. 14.9%; p = .002). A Cox regression predicting 1-year mortality resulted in a hazard ratio of 0.684 in favor of S3 (p = .0026). The same was true of stroke (2.8% vs. 5.7%; p = .0007), and moderate/severe PVL (2.7 vs. 7.3%; p = .0002) at 1 year. The rate of new pacemaker implantations (13.6% vs. 9.5%; p = .001) and NYHA III/IV (12.8 vs. 8.6%; p = .004) was higher with the S3. CONCLUSIONS: The improved features of the S3 appear to translate into improved survival and reduced rates of adverse complications, with the exception of a higher rate of new pacemaker implantations.

12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31808295

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with and without peripheral artery disease (PAD) in the BRAVO-3 trial with respect to the effect of bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin (UFH). BACKGROUND: PAD is found frequently in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and is reported to confer an increased risk of adverse events. It is unknown whether patients with and without PAD may demonstrate a differential response to bivalirudin versus UFH. METHODS: BRAVO-3 was a randomized multicenter trial comparing transfemoral TAVR with bivalirudin versus UFH (31 centers, n = 802). Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were a composite of 30-day death, myocardial infarction, or cerebrovascular accidents (CVA). Net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE) were a composite of major bleeding or MACE. RESULTS: The total cohort included 119 patients with PAD. Vascular complications occurred significantly more frequently in patients with PAD both in-hospital (25.2 vs. 16.7%; OR 1.68) and at 30 days (29.4 vs. 17.3%; OR 1.99). No significant differences were observed regarding mortality, NACE, MACE, major bleeding or CVA with bivalirudin versus UFH among patients with or without PAD. In patients with PAD, bivalirudin was associated with an increased risk of minor vascular complications at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PAD undergoing transfemoral TAVR did not exhibit an increased risk of any major adverse events, according to the procedural anticoagulant randomization. However, patients treated with Bivalirudin had significantly higher rates of minor vascular complications.

14.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 12(24): 2449-2459, 2019 Dec 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31857014

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated whether left ventricular (LV) stimulation via a guidewire-reduced procedure duration while maintaining efficacy and safety compared with standard right ventricular (RV) stimulation. BACKGROUND: Rapid ventricular pacing is necessary to ensure cardiac standstill during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, superiority, randomized controlled trial. Patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR with a SAPIEN valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) were allocated to LV or RV stimulation. The primary endpoint was procedure duration. Secondary endpoints included efficacy, safety, and cost at 30 days. RESULTS: Between May 2017 and May 2018, 307 patients were randomized, but 4 were excluded because they did not receive the intended treatment: 303 patients were analyzed in the LV (n = 151) or RV (n = 152) stimulation groups. Mean procedure duration was significantly shorter in the LV stimulation group (48.4 ± 16.9 min vs. 55.6 ± 26.9 min; p = 0.0013), with a difference of -0.12 (95% confidence interval: -0.20 to -0.05) in the log-transformed procedure duration (p = 0.0012). Effective stimulation was similar in the LV and RV stimulation groups: 124 (84.9%) versus 128 (87.1%) (p = 0.60). Safety of stimulation was also similar in the LV and RV stimulation groups: procedural success occurred in 151 (100%) versus 151 (99.3%) patients (p = 0.99); 30-day MACE-TAVR (major adverse cardiovascular event-transcatheter aortic valve replacement) occurred in 21 (13.9%) versus 26 (17.1%) patients (p = 0.44); fluoroscopy time (min) was lower in the LV stimulation group (13.48 ± 5.98 vs. 14.60 ± 5.59; p = 0.02), as was cost (€18,807 ± 1,318 vs. €19,437 ± 2,318; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with RV stimulation, LV stimulation during TAVR was associated with significantly reduced procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, and cost, with similar efficacy and safety. (Direct Left Ventricular Rapid Pacing Via the Valve Delivery Guide-wire in TAVR [EASY TAVI]; NCT02781896).

15.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 74(22): 2728-2739, 2019 Dec 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31779788

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Femoral access is the gold standard for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Guidelines recommend reconsidering surgery when this access is not feasible. However, alternative peripheral accesses exist, although they have not been accurately compared with femoral access. OBJECTIVES: This study compared nonfemoral peripheral (n-FP) TAVR with femoral TAVR. METHODS: Using the data from the national prospective French registry (FRANCE TAVI [French Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation]), this study compared the characteristics and outcomes of TAVR procedures according to whether they were performed through a femoral or a n-FP access, using a pre-specified propensity score-based matching between groups. Subanalysis during 2 study periods (2013 to 2015 and 2016 to 2017) and among low/intermediate-low and intermediate-high/high volume centers were performed. RESULTS: Among 21,611 patients, 19,995 (92.5%) underwent femoral TAVR and 1,616 (7.5%) underwent n-FP TAVR (transcarotid, n = 914 or trans-subclavian, n = 702). Patients in the n-FP access group had more severe disease (mean logistic EuroSCORE 19.95 vs. 16.95; p < 0.001), with a higher rate of peripheral vascular disease, known coronary artery disease, chronic pulmonary disease, and renal failure. After matching, there was no difference in the rate of post-procedural death and complications according to access site, except for a 2-fold lower rate of major vascular complications (odds ratio: 0.45; 95% confidence interval: 0.21 to 0.93; p = 0.032) and unplanned vascular repairs (odds ratio: 0.41; 95% confidence interval: 0.29 to 0.59; p < 0.001) in those who underwent n-FP access. The comparison of outcomes provided similar results during the second study period and in intermediate-high/high volume centers. CONCLUSIONS: n-FP TAVR is associated with similar outcomes compared with femoral peripheral TAVR, except for a 2-fold lower rate of major vascular complications and unplanned vascular repairs. n-FP TAVR may be favored over surgery in patients who are deemed ineligible for femoral TAVR and may be a safe alternative when femoral access risk is considered too high.

16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31727585

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Evaluation of reendothelialization with a new thin struts cobalt chromium alloy stent coated with a nano-layer of Polyzene™-F (PzF) in a rabbit iliac artery model. METHODS: Fifteen stented external rabbit iliac arteries were harvested at Day 7 for electron microscopy analysis following Cobra PzF stents implantation to assess reendothelialization and compare to historical data. Ten additional rabbits were used to assess time course of reendothelialization at 3 and 5 days. RESULTS: At Day 7, almost complete coverage of endothelial cells was observed with a coverage of 99.54 ±â€¯0.25% of the stented area. No thrombus area was noted. At Day 3, more than half of examined pieces was reendothelialized and reached 78.30 ±â€¯3.7% at Day 5 (p < .01 between each group). All stents were well expanded against the arterial wall and no struts were mal-apposed. CONCLUSIONS: Reendothelialization was rapid and complete at Day 7. This is the fastest reendothelization process after stenting in this model. No stent occlusion was observed.

17.
Diabetes Care ; 42(11): 2042-2049, 2019 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31615852

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The long-term outcome of allogenic islet transplantation is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the 10-year outcome of islet transplantation in patients with type 1 diabetes and hypoglycemia unawareness and/or a functioning kidney graft. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We enrolled in this prospective parallel-arm cohort study 28 subjects with type 1 diabetes who received islet transplantation either alone (ITA) or after a kidney graft (IAK). Islet transplantation consisted of two or three intraportal infusions of allogenic islets administered within (median [interquartile range]) 68 days (43-92). Immunosuppression was induced with interleukin-2 receptor antibodies and maintained with sirolimus and tacrolimus. The primary outcome was insulin independence with A1C ≤6.5% (48 mmol/mol). Secondary outcomes were patient and graft survival, severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs), metabolic control, and renal function. RESULTS: The primary outcome was met by (Kaplan-Meier estimates [95% CI]) 39% (22-57) and 28% (13-45) of patients 5 and 10 years after islet transplantation, respectively. Graft function persisted in 82% (62-92) and 78% (57-89) of case subjects after 5 and 10 years, respectively, and was associated with improved glucose control, reduced need for exogenous insulin, and a marked decrease of SHEs. ITA and IAK had similar outcomes. Primary graft function, evaluated 1 month after the last islet infusion, was significantly associated with the duration of graft function and insulin independence. CONCLUSIONS: Islet transplantation with the Edmonton protocol can provide 10-year markedly improved metabolic control without SHEs in three-quarters of patients with type 1 diabetes, kidney transplanted or not.

20.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg ; 56(6): 1140-1146, 2019 Dec 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31365061

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The transcarotid (TC) approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is potentially an optimal alternative to the transfemoral (TF) approach. Our goal was to compare the safety and efficacy of TC- and TF-TAVI. METHODS: Patients who underwent TF-TAVI or TC-TAVI in the prospectively collected FRANCE TAVI registry between January 2013 and December 2015 were compared. Propensity score inverse probability weighting methods were employed to minimize the impact of bias related to non-random treatment assignment. RESULTS: Of the 11 033 patients included in the current study, 10 598 (96%) underwent a TF-TAVI and 435 (4.1%) had a TC-TAVI. Patients in the TC-TAVI access group presented with a higher risk profile but were significantly younger. There were no differences in the perioperative and 2-year mortality rates after adjustment [odds ratio (OR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-1.68; P = 0.99 and hazard ratio 1.03, 95% CI 0.7-1.35; P = 0.83). TC-TAVI was associated with a significant risk of stroke (OR 2.42, 95% CI 2.01-2.92; P < 0.001), ST-elevation myocardial infarction (OR 7.32, 95% CI 3.87-13.87; P < 0.001), infections (OR 2.36, 95% CI 2.04-2.71; P < 0.001), bleeding (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.76-2.29; P < 0.001), renal failure (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.90-2.60; P < 0.001) and need for dialysis (OR 2.36, 95% CI 2.01-2.76, P < 0.001). Conversely, TC-TAVI was not confirmed as a risk factor for pacemaker implantation after adjustment (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.96-1.15; P < 0.28) and was a protective factor for vascular complications (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.32-0.43; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TC-TAVI is a safe procedure compared to TF-TAVI, although it holds an increased risk of perioperative complications. It should be considered in case of non-femoral peripheral access as the second access choice, to increase the overall safety of TAVI procedures.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA