Survival after transapical and transfemoral aortic valve implantation: Talking about two different patient populations

Abstract

Our patient and access site selection process, with the transfemoral technique considered the access site of first choice, results in comparable survival and morbidity for either transfemoral or transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Both techniques are associated with certain access site-specific complications that require highly qualified management. The neurologic risk profile of the patients should be included in the decision-making process before transcatheter aortic valve implantation, inasmuch as neurologic events may be reduced with the transapical access.

Anesthetic management and perioperative complications in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Turkish experience

“…Both the lengths of ICU and hospital stay of the patients in the follow-up period were comparable with those of other authors (16,20). Our results in regards to 30-day mortality also compare well with those reported in other recently published studies (23)(24)(25)(26). Nevertheless, the 1-year mortality in our series cannot be reported because we could not complete the followup period in all patients due to a lack of communication.…”

Transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Results of the Polish arm of the ROUTE registry

“…Alternatively, a transapical approach (TA-TAVI) can be employed [6]. Still, this route has certain limitations; it is not recommended in patients with chronic lung diseases or poor left ventricular function, and is associated with a risk of serious bleeding complications [7][8][9]. The use of transaortic (TAo) access is a more recently developed alternative to TA-TAVI and TF-TAVI [10,11].…”

The Prognosis in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

“…В настоящее время в мире проведено более 100000 ТИАК, результаты которых свидетельствуют о таких преимуществах данной методики, как более низкие по-казатели периоперационной летальности, сравни-тельно небольшое количество тяжелых осложнений и, соответственно, снижение затрат на госпитализацию и реабилитацию пациентов [7,8]. По современным дан-ным периоперационная летальность в группе мало-инвазивного протезирования АК не превышает 6-8% [9], что весьма близко к нашим данным -6,9%.…”