ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2018
Non-transfemoral access sites for transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Management of aortic stenosis: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and recommendations.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2021Pooled it
- Peripheral intravascular lithotripsy in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a case report.European heart journal. Case reports · 2025Article
- In-Hospital Outcomes in the Brazilian Registry of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation - 14-Year Analysis.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Article
- Ten-Year Experience with a Transapical Approach for Transcatheter Aortic and Mitral Valve Implantation.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Article
- Low Left-Ventricular Ejection Fraction as a Predictor of Intraprocedural Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement utilizing monitored anesthesia care: a case report.Future cardiology · 2024Article
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Access Sites: Same Goals, Distinct Aspects, Various Merits and Demerits.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
- Comparison of the Recent Updates to the ACC/AHA and ESC Guidelines for the Management of Valvular Heart Disease: Similarities and Differences.Current cardiology reports · 2023Review
- Transaxillary Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in a Patient With Previous Aortic Valve-Sparing Root Replacement: A Case Report.CJC open · 2023Article
- A Sharp Right Turn: A Case of Aortic to Right Atrial Fistula During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.The American journal of case reports · 2022Article
- Safety of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Aortic Aneurysm: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.Cardiology and therapy · 2022Article
- Vascular complications after transcatheter transfemoral aortic valve implantation: Modified sheath-to-femoral artery ratio as a new predictor.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2022Article
- Identifying Patients without a Survival Benefit following Transfemoral and Transapical Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- In-hospital outcomes of transapical versus surgical aortic valve replacement: from the U.S. national inpatient sample.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2021Article
- Twelve-month outcomes of transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2021Article
- A meta-analysis comparing transaxillary and transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a focus on transcarotid: a review of the current literature.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transfemoral access is currently the standard and preferred access site for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), though novel approaches are emerging to expand treatment options for the increasing numbers of patients with a contraindication for the traditional route. Previous publications have provided comparisons between two TAVR access sites, primarily transfemoral versus one of the novel approaches, while others have compared three or four novel approaches. The aim of this report is to provide a comprehensive summary of publications that analyse and compare the six non-transfemoral access sites currently described in the literature. These include the transapical, transaortic, axillary/subclavian, brachiocephalic, transcarotid, and transcaval approaches. Though there remains little consensus as to the superiority or non-inferiority of TAVR approaches, and there has yet to be randomized clinical trials to support published findings, with careful patient and procedural selection, outcomes for novel approaches have been reported to be comparable to standard transfemoral access when performed by skilled physicians. As such, choice of procedure is primarily based on registry data and the judgement of surgical teams as to which approach is best in each individual case. As TAVR continues to be an increasingly widespread treatment, search for the optimal access site will grow, and focus should be placed on the importance of educating surgeons as to all possible approaches so they may review and chose the most appropriate technique for a given patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.