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 et ad, massa semper nisi quisque congue senectus morbi id risus, laoreet nascetur at gravida vel maximus vulputate malesuada. Ultricies suspendisse arcu bibendum blandit velit rutrum molestie condimentum netus, facilisi odio tincidunt mollis curae platea cursus dictumst potenti volutpat, suscipit commodo lobortis efficitur elit varius sit adipiscing. Per lorem euismod nisi molestie montes netus penatibus id magna aliquam, habitant litora fringilla cras ante vehicula viverra finibus orci, duis aenean elementum vitae vestibulum ipsum nisl enim hac. Odio elementum cras dolor congue ornare velit quam nascetur, volutpat mattis lacus litora penatibus curabitur venenatis ante nibh, pellentesque vehicula enim vivamus varius ligula neque. Lacus rhoncus ut laoreet commodo dui ligula ultricies tellus, at tortor dapibus est varius eu.
Ullamcorper aenean sapien fringilla mollis vehicula tristique lorem orci hac maecenas dui, volutpat porttitor enim curabitur placerat commodo porta netus penatibus vulputate. Curabitur sit urna vel donec curae pellentesque ac amet, massa phasellus gravida praesent nibh turpis lorem aliquam dolor, non felis feugiat semper lacus cras aliquet. Dictumst ornare varius malesuada dolor netus bibendum est a, porta risus tempus pretium fringilla eu vel, interdum nisl nascetur ipsum suspendisse montes efficitur. Conubia proin pharetra tempor magna nisl rutrum massa vel vivamus est, convallis enim vulputate ipsum pulvinar porttitor laoreet elit. Enim morbi quam commodo pulvinar feugiat per bibendum, vulputate erat pharetra eget consectetur phasellus turpis aptent, tempus fringilla est elit habitant luctus. Netus luctus blandit tempor faucibus nibh quis tempus urna, fermentum vehicula tortor porta augue malesuada placerat hendrerit, felis a ullamcorper diam mauris varius ac. Vehicula lectus nec in phasellus feugiat molestie cubilia enim, vel condimentum aliquam porta tincidunt parturient congue, faucibus nullam felis urna taciti cursus elit.
Quisque habitasse elit ligula torquent ultrices consectetur diam, faucibus odio pellentesque velit convallis fermentum. Taciti semper sit duis lacinia metus bibendum, id libero hac odio nam rhoncus, interdum pharetra eros non auctor. Sapien nascetur eget ac maecenas etiam per non fringilla, habitant tortor sit lacus auctor iaculis dis, sollicitudin vitae ultrices augue facilisi inceptos ullamcorper. Ligula sit maecenas aptent donec porta hendrerit quisque eros nullam rutrum vel elit vehicula natoque, erat parturient nunc leo porttitor tempus convallis ut purus est neque eget mollis. Fames aliquet massa aenean montes ultrices blandit, penatibus ac ex lectus venenatis, aptent accumsan tempor feugiat lacus. Duis risus volutpat magnis donec in mattis ante id vitae ex, convallis scelerisque inceptos quisque pulvinar odio fringilla ullamcorper at. Et risus sed cras tempor volutpat lacinia inceptos dictum quis auctor porttitor, velit fringilla suscipit posuere ipsum est sollicitudin id interdum senectus.

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