Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid
Valladolid, 47003, Spain
NCT Number: NCT04274751
Retrospective, observational study to compare the outcomes of patient receiving TAVI through transfemoral and transaxillary fully percutaneous approach adjusting for main baseline differences.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Observational
Valladolid, 47003, Spain
Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most frequently treated heart valve disease in our society. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was originally described through an antegrade transeptal route by Cribier and colleagues in 2002. Because of the complexity of the procedure and risks of damaging the mitral apparatus, this approach was abandoned in favor of less challenging alternatives, with transfemoral (TF) route as primary option. Nevertheless, the TF approach is not feasible or of high risk in between 15 and 35% of the patients and vascular complications have been shown to be an independent predictor of death warranting alternative access techniques for TAVI. In this regard, the transapical, direct aortic, transcarotid, transcaval, and transubclavian/transaxillary (TSc) implantation routes currently serve as alternative access options. The TSc approach was initially used in selected cases. However, recent series suggest that TSc may provide better outcomes than alternative routes when TF is inadequate. Additionally, same studies suggest that, as compared to TF approach, TSc TAVI may present lower rate of vascular complications with comparable rates of other major outcomes despite the worse baseline profile of patients who are considered inappropriate for TF procedures. Moreover, fully-percutaneous TSc approach can be successfully performed with low rate of complications as was recently proposed by some authors. However, comparisons have been based in small series of cases, most of them with former iteration of TAVI devices, and a formal prospective comparison has never been performed. Therefore, our aim is to gather all cases of fully-percutaneous TSc and TF approaches for TAVI in Spain and Portugal and compare the standardized safety and efficacy endpoints through a matched analysis.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
-
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation
Time frame: 30 day
Combined endpoint of death, stroke or embolic events, PVE or sepsis at 30-day follow up.
Time frame: 1 year
Combined endpoint of death, stroke or embolic events, PVE or sepsis at 1-year follow up.
Time frame: Intraprocedural
Intraprocedural Vascular complications
Time frame: 7-days
In-hospital Vascular complications
Time frame: 30-days
Short term complications related to the approach.
Time frame: 1-year
Mid term complications related to the approach.
Ignacio J. Amat Santos
Other
Comparison of Transaxillary and Transfemoral Fully-percutaneous Approaches for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: The TRANSAX Study
Acronym: TRANSAX
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT02729519
Aortic Valve Disease, Aortic Valve Stenosis
Montpellier, France
View Trial DetailsNCT07605780
Aortic Valve Disease, Aortic Valve Stenosis
Brescia, BS, Italy
View Trial DetailsNCT06171802
Aortic Valve Disease, Aortic Valve Stenosis
Copenhagen, Denmark
View Trial DetailsNCT05774691
Aortic Valve Disease, Aortic Valve Stenosis
Aalst, Belgium
View Trial Details