2003
DOI: 10.1177/112972980300400403
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Carotid Artery Approach as an Alternative to Femoral access for Balloon Dilation of Aortic Valve Stenosis in Neonates and Infants

Abstract: Our experience confirms that the carotid access proposed in 1973 by Azzolina et al is a valid and safe alternative to the usual percutaneous femoral access. In particular it could be useful in neonates and infants were the size of femoral vessels could facilitate important and dangerous complications.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This likely explains the high incidence of vascular complications, similar to those described in the first reported studies, and cannot be compared with more recent reports in which the same approach was used. The absence of vascular complications seen in patients undergoing carotid surgical cut‐down in this study correlates with previous reports using the same approach [32, 33]. Currently, it seems reasonable to support the carotid artery approach as a good alternative when performing BAVP in newborns, considering individual variations at different institutions.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…This likely explains the high incidence of vascular complications, similar to those described in the first reported studies, and cannot be compared with more recent reports in which the same approach was used. The absence of vascular complications seen in patients undergoing carotid surgical cut‐down in this study correlates with previous reports using the same approach [32, 33]. Currently, it seems reasonable to support the carotid artery approach as a good alternative when performing BAVP in newborns, considering individual variations at different institutions.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Given that the neonatal carotid artery is larger in diameter than the femoral artery, [16][17][18] carotid access may play an important role in preventing the complications of femoral artery thrombosis when applied to this higher risk infant population. However, to help justify accessing the carotid artery to spare the femoral artery, the relative risk and relative consequence of occluding each of these vessels should ideally be known.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Carotid artery access was not performed to avoid possible risks on carotid trauma or cerebral embolism in these small vessel patients. Recent data show that surgical cutdown [16] and percutaneous [17] carotid artery access are relatively safe alternatives to percutaneous femoral access in neonates and infants. However, carotid artery thrombosis has been observed in these series with unknown effects on brain injury and outcome.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%