ObjectiveTo systematically assess the efficacy and safety of percutaneous access and surgical cutdown in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI).MethodsWe searched databases including the Cochrane Library, PubMed, OVID, Embase, China National Knowledge Internet and Wanfang Database to collect randomized or non-randomized controlled trials comparing percutaneous access (PC group, the trial/exposure group) with surgical cutdown (SC group, the control group) in TF-TAVI between January 2002 and October 2017. The quality evaluation and data extraction were carried out by 2 reviewers independently. The Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3.5 software.ResultsA total of 11 literatures involving 4 893 aortic valve stenosis patients treated by TF-TAVI (2 877 patients in PC group and 2 016 patients in SC group) were included in this Meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between PC and SC group in terms of major vascular complications [odds ratio (OR)=0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.70, 1.06), P=0.17], minor vascular complications [OR=1.43, 95%CI (0.87, 2.37), P=0.16], major bleeding [OR=1.02, 95%CI (0.55, 1.90), P=0.94], minor bleeding [OR=0.90, 95%CI (0.51, 1.61), P=0.73] and all-cause mortality within 30 days [OR=1.03, 95%CI (0.76, 1.40), P=0.85]. As for the length of stay after TAVI, there was significant difference between the two groups [standard mean difference=–0.32, 95%CI (–0.52, –0.12), P=0.002].ConclusionPercutaneous access is as effective and safe as surgical cutdown in TF-TAVI, meanwhile leading to shorter length of stay after TAVI.
Objective To compare the clinical and hemodynamic results of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with different vascular approaches. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the baseline status, procedure status, procedure-related clinical complications defined by Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document, and postoperative hemodynamic results of patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR between April 2012 and January 2019 in West China Hospital of Sichuan University. Results A total of 436 patients were enrolled, including 58 patients undergoing surgical cutdown and 378 patients undergoing percutaneous puncture. The prevalence of tumor in the surgical cutdown group was higher than that in the percutaneous puncture group (8.62% vs. 2.65%, P=0.037), while the other baseline characteristics, including age, male proportion, body mass index, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores, were similar between the two groups (P>0.05); the proportion of patients with aortic regurgitation equal to or greater than a moderate degree in the surgical cutdown group was lower than that in the percutaneous puncture group (22.41% vs. 35.98%, P=0.043), and there was no statistically significant difference in other preoperative cardiac ultrasound-related indicators (P>0.05). The procedure success rate was high in both groups (96.55% vs. 98.68%, P=0.236). Immediately after operation, the incidences of new-onset left bundle branch block (43.10% vs. 24.87%, P=0.004), severe bleeding (12.07% vs. 4.23%, P=0.030), and mild bleeding (20.69% vs. 3.44%, P<0.001) were higher in the surgical cutdown group than those in the percutaneous puncture group, and the postoperative hemodynamics indicated that there was no statistically significant difference in maximum blood flow velocity between the two groups [(2.37±0.52) vs. (2.50±1.67) m/s, P=0.274]. At the 1 year follow-up, the cardiac death rate (5.17% vs. 3.17%, P=0.696) and all-causes mortality rate (8.62% vs. 8.47%, P=1.000) between the two groups were not statistically different.Conclusions Compared with percutaneous puncture, surgical cutdown is associated with a higher incidence of bleeding events, while the incidence of other clinical complications such as vascular complications and the postoperative hemodynamic outcomes were similar.