Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory, Cardiothoracic and Vascular Department, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy.
EuroIntervention. 2013 Sep 10;9 Suppl:S33-7. doi: 10.4244/EIJV9SSA7.
The standard approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is through the transfemoral retrograde route, because it is minimally invasive and it is feasible under conscious sedation in a totally percutaneous fashion. When the transfemoral access is not feasible, the most used approaches are the transapical for the balloon-expandable Edwards SAPIEN XT valve, the subclavian for the Medtronic self-expandable CoreValve and the transaortic for both prostheses. We believe that the subclavian approach should be the first option to consider in patients with contraindications to the transfemoral approach, but also in those patients who appear at higher risk of vascular complications in the case of a feasible but difficult transfemoral approach. Although no direct comparison between the subclavian, transaortic and transapical approaches is available, in our opinion the subclavian access should be favoured, because of its lower invasiveness and its feasibility without general anaesthesia. The choice of vascular access should be taken by the Heart Team and should remain patient-centred rather than operator-preference driven.
经股动脉逆行入路是经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)的标准入路,因为它微创,并且可以在全身麻醉下经皮穿刺完成。当经股动脉入路不可行时,最常使用的方法是经心尖入路用于球囊扩张式爱德华兹 SAPIEN XT 瓣膜,锁骨下入路用于美敦力自膨式 CoreValve,经主动脉入路用于两种瓣膜。我们认为,对于经股动脉入路禁忌的患者,以及对于那些在可行但经股动脉入路困难的情况下有更高血管并发症风险的患者,锁骨下入路应作为首选。虽然无法进行锁骨下入路、经主动脉入路和经心尖入路之间的直接比较,但我们认为锁骨下入路更具优势,因为它的侵袭性更小,并且可以在无需全身麻醉的情况下完成。血管入路的选择应由心脏团队做出,并应保持以患者为中心,而不是以术者偏好为导向。