Department of Internal Medicine, Nepalese Army Institute of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, 44600, Nepal.
Department of Internal Medicine, Province Hospital, Birendranagar, Surkhet, Karnali Province 21700, Nepal.
Curr Probl Cardiol. 2024 May;49(5):102488. doi: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102488. Epub 2024 Feb 28.
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) is the treatment of choice in patients with severe aortic stenosis. Transcarotid (TCa) or Trans-axillary/subclavian (TAx/Sc) are safer and less invasive non-femoral approaches, where transfemoral access is difficult or impossible to obtain.
This meta-analysis was performed based on PRISMA guidelines after registering in PROSPERO (CRD42023482842). This meta-analysis was performed to compare the safety of the transcarotid and trans-axillary/subclavian approach for TAVR including studies from inception to October 2023.
Seven studies with a total of 6227 patients were included in the analysis (TCa: 2566; TAx/Sc: 3661). Transcarotid TAVR approach had a favorable trend for composite of stroke and all-cause mortality (OR 0.79, CI 0.60-1.04), all-cause mortality, stroke, major vascular complication, and new requirement of permanent pacemaker though those were statistically insignificant. On sub-analysis of the results of the studies based on the territory (USA vs French), composite outcome of all cause mortality, stroke and major bleeding (OR 0.54, CI 0.54-0.81), composite of stroke and all cause mortality (OR 0.64, CI 0.50-0.81), and stroke/TIA (OR 0.53, CI 0.39-0.73) showed lower odds of occurrence among patient managed with TCa approach in the American cohort.
Overall, transcarotid approach had favorable though statistically insignificant odds for composite (stroke and all-cause mortality) and individual outcomes (stroke, all-cause mortality, etc.). There are significant variations in observed outcomes based on study's geographic location. Large prospective randomized clinical trials comparing the two approaches with representative samples are necessary to guide the clinicians in choosing among these approaches.
经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)是严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者的首选治疗方法。经颈动脉(TCa)或经腋动脉/锁骨下动脉(TAx/Sc)是更安全、创伤更小的非股动脉入路,在股动脉入路难以或不可能获得的情况下使用。
本研究按照 PRISMA 指南进行,并在 PROSPERO(CRD42023482842)中进行了注册。本荟萃分析旨在比较 TAVR 经颈动脉和经腋动脉/锁骨下动脉入路的安全性,包括从开始到 2023 年 10 月的研究。
共有 7 项研究(TCa:2566 例;TAx/Sc:3661 例)共 6227 例患者纳入分析。经颈动脉 TAVR 方法在复合终点(卒中和全因死亡率)、全因死亡率、卒中和主要血管并发症以及新需要永久性起搏器方面有良好的趋势,但这些结果没有统计学意义。根据研究的地域(美国与法国)进行亚组分析,全因死亡率、卒中和主要出血的复合终点(OR 0.54,CI 0.54-0.81)、卒中和全因死亡率的复合终点(OR 0.64,CI 0.50-0.81)以及卒中和 TIA(OR 0.53,CI 0.39-0.73)的结果显示,在美国队列中,接受 TCa 方法治疗的患者发生复合终点和个体结局(卒中和全因死亡率等)的可能性较低。
总体而言,经颈动脉入路的复合终点(卒中和全因死亡率)和个体结局(卒中等)的发生风险有利,但无统计学意义。观察结果因研究地理位置的不同而存在显著差异。需要进行比较两种方法的大型前瞻性随机临床试验,并纳入有代表性的样本,以指导临床医生在这些方法之间进行选择。