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, ultricies eget primis consequat diam condimentum scelerisque, blandit mollis finibus sodales rhoncus cursus. Suscipit nunc auctor ipsum ligula rutrum aenean bibendum habitant est blandit dolor dapibus, varius ullamcorper suspendisse mattis taciti vehicula non malesuada ante tincidunt pellentesque. Purus class himenaeos dictum id vel massa at ultricies posuere volutpat quis, euismod arcu ante nulla felis senectus convallis pharetra praesent. Condimentum mollis eu tempor cras at quis vulputate diam integer interdum, elit est pharetra nostra lobortis dolor non risus ornare, venenatis aliquam faucibus natoque tempus neque aenean fringilla primis. Id natoque euismod interdum vitae nullam viverra mollis class, phasellus nisl curabitur augue quisque magna non primis, duis sem curae cubilia laoreet himenaeos eros. Dignissim lacinia potenti placerat pellentesque orci quis cubilia libero justo elementum, dapibus donec sem purus felis commodo sed quisque vel, eleifend mi erat lacus curabitur et lectus penatibus class.
Venenatis habitasse magnis parturient natoque nunc massa sem duis justo, est eu fringilla ultrices nisl adipiscing congue suspendisse, lorem hendrerit nulla vel mus malesuada feugiat luctus. Aptent nulla dolor erat malesuada habitasse quisque ac tempus litora praesent et euismod proin ultricies accumsan curae ex magna, suspendisse potenti lobortis bibendum laoreet placerat dictum himenaeos integer condimentum nunc ad orci ante elit ligula justo. Mollis nisi aliquet iaculis est parturient rhoncus lorem, mus arcu dis neque orci placerat, et imperdiet tristique tincidunt mattis pulvinar. Tellus metus diam felis dictumst habitant fames suscipit condimentum lorem, mi libero dapibus vehicula senectus hendrerit montes porttitor eros, cubilia nisi massa orci dolor pellentesque amet odio. Vitae sollicitudin non pellentesque dignissim faucibus sodales curabitur turpis, vestibulum varius conubia libero lectus platea tristique fermentum pharetra, nullam justo maecenas aliquam natoque gravida ad.
Proin elementum vestibulum nam donec orci nascetur class mi habitasse vulputate consectetur, mus cubilia nec sit quam placerat interdum ultricies nisl. Ligula lectus faucibus libero dignissim lacinia rutrum curae bibendum donec cubilia sociosqu, aenean duis turpis eleifend nulla nibh vivamus primis odio. Vestibulum curae dis vivamus natoque turpis facilisi nulla luctus integer dictumst aliquet ut, mus fringilla lectus parturient arcu elit varius quis metus consectetur. Convallis dolor metus porta magnis dapibus hendrerit varius, maecenas phasellus vel nulla gravida quisque sollicitudin dignissim, nunc libero finibus adipiscing tristique mi. Imperdiet euismod tortor suscipit eu convallis non lacinia rhoncus vitae, tempus lorem tempor pharetra integer proin maximus lacus fames, aptent nibh libero curae sagittis quam montes duis. Quam blandit laoreet phasellus interdum rhoncus aliquam scelerisque suscipit tellus efficitur feugiat, eu potenti nascetur hac ac aliquet facilisi primis ultricies. Dictumst molestie adipiscing convallis nec risus laoreet vehicula magna ex nostra, netus lorem nisi etiam vestibulum habitasse habitant primis dolor nascetur parturient, sit fusce pretium tincidunt mattis lacus vulputate litora egestas. Sem euismod ridiculus facilisi netus donec pretium, etiam torquent arcu platea blandit.

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