ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026
Ultrasound versus angiographic guided access in transfemoral TAVI: intra-operator evaluation of vascular and bleeding complications.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBoth angiography roadmap (RM) and ultrasound (US) are commonly used to obtain femoral arterial access during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). In this analysis, we sought to evaluate the effect of implementation of an US-guided approach on vascular and bleeding complications.
methodsVascular complications and bleeding at the main access site were compared using 4-year data from two experienced TAVI-operators, who changed their practice from an exclusively RM- to an exclusively US-guided technique for access in transfemoral TAVI.
resultsA total of 1026 patients were analyzed (RM: n = 485, US: n = 541) with a mean age of 80.7 ± 6.3 years; 47.7% were female and 37.1% received a balloon-expandable valve. Main access vascular complications, bleedings, or their composite were lower in the US-group (RM vs. US: 16.1% vs. 8.3%, p < 0.001). US was a protective factor for vascular complications, bleeding and their composite (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.51, 95%-confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.77, p = 0.002; adjusted OR 0.46, 95%-CI 0.28-0.78, p = 0.003; and adjusted OR: 0.47; 95% CI 0.32-0.70, p < 0.001, respectively). Fluoroscopy time (14 [interquartile range (IQR) 11 - 20] min vs. 13 [IQR 10 - 17] min, p < 0.001), contrast use (88 [IQR 69 - 111] ml vs. 84 [IQR 65 - 110] ml, p = 0.049) and procedure time (52 [IQR 44 - 67] min vs. 49 [IQR 41 - 62] min, p = 0.02) were lower in the US-group.
conclusionsUS-guided femoral access was associated with significantly fewer complications compared with RM-guidance, supporting its adoption even among operators experienced with angiographic guidance.
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.