科研速览 · Science Skim继续刷下去 · Keep skimming →
◆ Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026-09-03

Routine versus selective use of a femoral protection wire in transfemoral TAVI: a single-centre analysis of vascular complications.

Marc Adrian Rogmann, Victor Klingemann, Max Meertens, Majid Ahoopai, Karl-Philipp Rommel, Philipp Lurz, Ralph S von Bardeleben, Martin Geyer

一句话结论 · In one sentence

In contemporary transfemoral TAVI, routine protection wire use was not associated with reduced major vascular complications and was linked to a higher rate of minor access site injuries. These findings support a restrictive rather than routine use of protection wires in current practice.

原始摘要(英文原文)· Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the treatment of choice for severe aortic stenosis in patients with elevated surgical risk. However, vascular complications remain a major source of morbidity and mortality. The protection wire technique was introduced to prevent major access-related complications, but its role in contemporary TAVI practice is uncertain. AIMS: To evaluate whether routine protection wire use reduces vascular complications in contemporary transfemoral TAVI. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, single-centre analysis of 1476 consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI between January 2020 and August 2023. Until November 2021, protection wire placement was standard-of-care (Group 1, n = 801); thereafter procedures were performed without routine protection wire use (Group 2, n = 675). Vascular complications were defined according to VARC-3 criteria. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of minor and major vascular complications. RESULTS: The composite of minor and major vascular complications occurred more frequently in Group 1 than in Group 2 (18.6% vs. 10.8%, p < 0.001). In Group 1, 34.8% of access-related complications were associated with the protection wire access. Major vascular complications were numerically less frequent in Group 2 (2.5% vs. 4.2%). Omission of routine protection wire placement was independently associated with a lower risk (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38-0.72, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In contemporary transfemoral TAVI, routine protection wire use was not associated with reduced major vascular complications and was linked to a higher rate of minor access site injuries. These findings support a restrictive rather than routine use of protection wires in current practice.
读原文 · Read the paper ↗

AI 追问PRO

登录后使用 AI 追问

讨论区

登录后参与讨论

相关论文 · Related

Routine versus selective use of a femoral protection wire in transfemoral TAVI: a single-centre analysis of vascular complications. — 科研速览 Science Skim