Do we need alternative access in TAVR anymore?

EuroIntervention 2020;15:e1305-e1306. DOI: 10.4244/EIJV15I15A237

Walid Ben Ali
Walid Ben Ali1,2, MD, PhD; Pavel Overtchouk1, MD; Thomas Modine1, MD, PhD
1. Department of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart Valve Center, Institut Cœur Poumon CHU de Lille, Lille, France; 2. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Montreal Heart Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has expanded widely in recent years. The femoral access constitutes the gold standard and the first-line access for TAVR procedures1,2, allowing totally percutaneous procedures. Despite several iterations in device profiles and the improvement of TAVR techniques, 10 to 15% of patients are deemed ineligible for femoral access due to unfavourable femoral or aortic anatomy3. While the European guidelines4 recommend the surgical option in intermediate-risk patients if the femoral access is not feasible, non-femoral peripheral (nFP) accesses have emerged as alternatives to the femoral access, achieving comparable results in high-volume centres5,6 with a trend towards more minimalist ...

Sign in to read and download the full article

Forgot your password?

No account yet?
Sign up for free!

Create my pcr account

Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from PCRonline.com

Read next article
Sustained safety and efficacy of the magnesium scaffold: does the Magmaris scaffold call for the return of BRS research… and randomised controlled trials?

Latest news