Skip to main content
Case Report

Expandable Sheath Perforation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Bernadette Speiser, BSN, MSN, CCRN, RCIS; Xi Yuan, BSN, RCIS

Palo Alto Health Care System, Department of Veteran’s Affairs, Palo Alto, California

Editor's Note: A pdf is available for download at right (look for the red PDF icon).

July 2021

Introduction

Aortic stenosis has been treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) since 2002 by Dr. Cribier and his colleagues.¹ The most common delivery technique for catheter-based valve replacement has been the retrograde femoral artery approach. Initially, access was achieved in the clinical arena via surgical cutdown. However, due to improvements in technology, reduction in sheath size, and large-bore catheter vascular closure devices (VCD), there has been accumulating evidence supporting the percutaneous approach’s superior safety and efficacy.²

Nakamura et al³ identified the feasibility of the complete percutaneous approach and included acceptable safety and clinical benefits. The percutaneous arm versus the surgical cut-down arm of their study identified a reduction in wound infections, reduction in hospital bed days of care, and fewer bleeding complications. However, the group also noted that while the incidence of vascular events was higher in the percutaneous group, it did not affect in-hospital mortality. The Spanish TAVI Registry also reported that the percutaneous approach bore higher rates of minor vascular complications but lower rates of major bleeding at 30 days and at mid-term follow-up.⁴ Iliofemoral vascular complications weren’t common for the percutaneous group. Aortic complications were rare (0.6-1.9%), but carried a high mortality rate.

Prior to the TAVR procedure, a computed tomography angiography (CTA) is utilized in part to help identify vascular access risks. The luminal diameter of the access vessels, presence of any dissections, height of bifurcation vessels, and calcium burden are essential to evaluate and ensure a successful percutaneous approach. For the 26 mm Sapien 3 Ultra valve (Edwards Lifesciences), the product literature states the requirement of a minimum diameter of 5.5 mm for the 14 French delivery system.

During access, utilization of ultrasound guidance as well as fluoroscopic imaging should be implemented to compare specific landmarks. Use of the common femoral artery CTA  in comparison to the femoral head on fluoroscopy will provide further delineation of access entry.

Please Log In To View
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur, adipiscing elit primis tempus condimentum sem, platea justo tortor curae. Dignissim litora congue etiam blandit ipsum tristique quisque ac, mattis mus at cubilia vestibulum imperdiet ante, tempor habitasse dis accumsan duis facilisi nec.
Odio cursus consequat nam tempus quisque dui, conubia maximus nec senectus sem varius venenatis, vestibulum habitasse libero purus tempor. Leo pulvinar nulla aptent curae ridiculus accumsan vulputate enim velit, himenaeos maximus vitae litora turpis risus ligula phasellus vestibulum class, ornare nibh nunc conubia suscipit tempus iaculis facilisi. Fames bibendum pretium posuere convallis diam facilisi mus, duis penatibus dapibus habitant euismod. Semper primis netus nulla aptent fusce tortor vivamus, fames ligula eleifend donec mollis nullam. Habitasse quisque nascetur felis per sapien nec rhoncus, et habitant vulputate rutrum integer ornare, tempor augue suspendisse venenatis ad lorem. Vel maecenas urna tincidunt quam mollis enim dignissim nec sodales parturient primis metus per class condimentum, nunc dolor nostra taciti eget elit ex rutrum donec natoque curae quisque vivamus netus. Magna per neque diam conubia justo rhoncus luctus quisque netus, libero malesuada vitae iaculis tristique senectus ac fames facilisis congue, pulvinar hac id vestibulum lacus nisl dictumst inceptos. Risus natoque a feugiat pretium dui molestie placerat imperdiet, aptent accumsan potenti ultrices arcu tempus lacus, class egestas dignissim cursus platea sodales eu. Donec orci fermentum quam ipsum vulputate tempus tellus cras netus senectus, congue taciti penatibus porttitor porta enim cubilia dignissim viverra, mattis mauris lacus eleifend erat aenean eros urna montes.
Consectetur mauris egestas pulvinar libero penatibus hac commodo neque mattis, adipiscing vivamus scelerisque metus ultrices amet sapien dapibus aliquam sagittis, imperdiet venenatis tempus montes sit primis a sodales. Convallis nascetur efficitur pretium lectus sagittis hac himenaeos mi auctor integer sit rutrum gravida, tellus elementum eu a suscipit tempus vitae class at odio curae. Ultrices turpis senectus consequat eleifend malesuada neque purus habitasse, luctus nascetur vel sem curae tempus. Scelerisque iaculis mattis cubilia class maecenas nulla sagittis velit torquent himenaeos, eleifend dignissim inceptos curae condimentum aliquam commodo ultrices venenatis. Neque egestas nostra bibendum efficitur dolor taciti, purus orci porttitor eget potenti dapibus, mi magna accumsan massa diam.

References

1. Genereux P, Webb JG, SvensonLG, et al. Vascular complications after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 60: 1043-1052.

2. Vora AN, Rao SV. Percutaneous or surgical access for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Thorac Dis. 2018 Nov; 10(Suppl 30): S3595-S3598. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.09.48

3. Nakamura M, Chakavarty T, Jilaihami H, et al. Complete percutaneous approach for arterial access in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a comparison with surgical cut-down and closure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 84: 293-300.

4. Hernandez-Enriquez M, Andrea R, Brugaletta S, et al. Puncture versus surgical cutdown complicaitons of transfemoral aortic valve implantation (from the Spanish TAVI Registry). Am J Cardiol. 2016; 118: 578-84.

5. Scarsini R, De Maria GL, Joseph J, et al. Impact of complications during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: how can they be avoided and managed? J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 Sep 17; 8(18): e013801. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.013801