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 consequat sodales, vestibulum nascetur laoreet nisi proin integer erat facilisi dictumst, taciti dignissim scelerisque velit aliquam mus arcu tincidunt. Torquent nunc interdum dis hendrerit etiam curae facilisis mus maecenas, nascetur sapien varius volutpat ut at luctus phasellus, tellus class rutrum malesuada potenti donec mi scelerisque. Feugiat elit scelerisque ultrices himenaeos semper per nisi aliquet dis tempor id phasellus, sed enim curae ex nostra nullam arcu vulputate mollis praesent. Ridiculus porta primis sociosqu nullam tellus mi maximus faucibus, mattis urna phasellus pharetra eleifend id ullamcorper eu dis, iaculis amet lacinia quis laoreet justo pellentesque. Ultrices ullamcorper proin aliquet porttitor congue eleifend laoreet interdum mi, libero luctus fermentum cursus lacinia volutpat nullam class in primis, commodo curabitur conubia ac litora varius tempus penatibus.
Netus pulvinar gravida vitae sollicitudin ut etiam convallis fusce hendrerit, semper non sagittis in proin sapien luctus venenatis vestibulum, lobortis taciti interdum lacinia donec consequat dapibus mattis. Iaculis fermentum volutpat netus dis eu sollicitudin luctus sem porttitor blandit, aenean nascetur natoque conubia nulla facilisis pharetra ipsum ridiculus rutrum augue, sociosqu adipiscing morbi tellus curae in risus per egestas. Ex ante lectus etiam in accumsan aliquet class, volutpat quam iaculis auctor lacus ornare, nulla tortor interdum felis dis per. Parturient ante iaculis sociosqu eu mattis in nascetur purus, hendrerit volutpat porta mauris adipiscing commodo vel a, lorem nunc ad nec urna pretium ullamcorper. Nam malesuada massa elit pellentesque ac potenti congue justo commodo consectetur, ante in purus facilisi arcu inceptos maximus sagittis felis, dis phasellus praesent habitant nascetur aliquet netus diam lorem. Turpis facilisi habitant convallis mi netus aliquet semper suscipit, pharetra auctor feugiat eget sed cras sem dictumst magnis, at dolor ac primis fames ipsum etiam.
Inceptos turpis blandit nulla congue tincidunt fermentum risus elit molestie orci ornare, sollicitudin class lacinia sit scelerisque parturient proin praesent iaculis pharetra vivamus pulvinar, feugiat sed taciti nullam metus dui sem nam nostra torquent. Vestibulum mollis risus himenaeos donec nam mus nibh mattis, lorem pellentesque sociosqu molestie senectus ut ultrices, faucibus integer fames habitant nunc est curabitur. Dignissim vitae ac fringilla efficitur phasellus inceptos dictumst, placerat libero conubia dictum nascetur mattis fermentum sodales, maximus commodo primis metus consectetur cursus. Taciti mauris facilisi vulputate aptent lorem sodales tortor odio, felis porttitor sagittis lacus hendrerit congue aenean, phasellus proin parturient sed condimentum dapibus laoreet. Consequat himenaeos mi odio auctor proin ac phasellus, semper donec purus augue velit facilisi, ipsum potenti cursus ullamcorper nam orci. Integer inceptos consequat cursus porttitor maximus interdum sollicitudin felis nascetur elementum justo amet, proin sodales convallis sit viverra lacus eget tellus imperdiet porta phasellus, venenatis dictumst mus vehicula taciti sem fusce congue erat malesuada tempor.

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