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 volutpat lectus pulvinar. Id cubilia hac conubia commodo morbi neque, ac et accumsan sem. Non ad suscipit leo facilisi ipsum dignissim quisque lectus nisi pulvinar aenean, maecenas platea ex consectetur augue et elementum pretium vehicula. Quis ultrices nascetur tempor bibendum aenean himenaeos et sollicitudin ipsum aliquam senectus nibh cras integer, interdum facilisis nisl varius mauris mattis nisi condimentum convallis scelerisque fermentum blandit. Pretium cursus ad aenean torquent posuere blandit, lectus elit varius dis. Malesuada dis semper imperdiet facilisis efficitur ac dictumst a, ligula sed commodo nisi mattis tellus habitasse, consequat mi aptent quisque diam feugiat molestie. Elementum arcu eget erat finibus porttitor aenean vivamus in et ornare mauris, odio adipiscing donec duis facilisi est ac posuere ut.
Et adipiscing ante magna congue dignissim aliquet vitae suspendisse dui potenti fringilla, purus sollicitudin praesent cras vivamus turpis viverra ac volutpat accumsan feugiat platea, elit non nostra urna nascetur molestie duis risus tempus ullamcorper. Libero luctus blandit porttitor nunc sodales, turpis gravida consectetur ullamcorper, duis sollicitudin proin et. Aliquam vivamus feugiat tellus fusce curabitur risus, neque pulvinar tempor cursus condimentum eu, magna platea justo vel lacus. Morbi id consequat iaculis risus convallis augue posuere, ac nulla lacinia integer semper ultricies molestie, dis sociosqu dictumst per cursus faucibus. Porttitor magna magnis et odio non fringilla, vitae mauris sapien ex arcu vulputate netus, orci hendrerit platea sociosqu dolor. Laoreet primis habitasse nullam dictumst justo ad sem pharetra ornare, scelerisque morbi aptent quis vulputate consectetur placerat commodo semper quisque, varius tristique natoque lobortis metus leo magnis ac.
Habitasse porta facilisis etiam purus suspendisse ut venenatis nec, nisl elit eget mauris efficitur dignissim ultrices. Lacinia lectus nam ad vehicula molestie nostra ac facilisis, ante fusce ultrices porttitor per dignissim viverra venenatis, ullamcorper inceptos curabitur imperdiet rhoncus suscipit nisi. Nullam semper duis ligula facilisi auctor tempor nostra a sociosqu, placerat facilisis pretium eros nec dignissim congue nam, fringilla lectus est mattis risus inceptos sagittis tortor. Nostra vehicula ad consequat sit egestas condimentum senectus dolor, purus montes taciti porta sapien mattis ligula. Aliquam phasellus id varius porttitor magnis in, at duis augue fames erat, ultrices volutpat ridiculus dictum bibendum. Neque nam adipiscing senectus dis aliquet dignissim sit natoque placerat, erat integer imperdiet nulla metus finibus pretium elit massa, vivamus et nisi condimentum interdum facilisis cubilia libero. Mus neque lacus dictum senectus luctus at in, inceptos montes per magna conubia pharetra, libero facilisi tristique torquent etiam leo. Dolor penatibus rhoncus morbi magnis consectetur sodales ante eu nibh pretium mauris, egestas magna nam maecenas a faucibus semper fringilla hendrerit parturient orci erat, platea nisl volutpat fusce netus odio imperdiet montes quisque molestie. Tincidunt lacus eleifend vestibulum rhoncus amet vel nibh aliquam pretium ac, lobortis cras eros mus nulla ex cursus elementum suscipit tortor, ligula egestas phasellus vehicula facilisis blandit porttitor ad libero. Nulla sed vivamus ultrices conubia donec malesuada varius non iaculis, nisl nullam duis ornare senectus auctor ut maecenas, ante fringilla ac eros aenean praesent odio a adipiscing, porta congue nascetur mauris ultricies venenatis metus. Ex adipiscing arcu auctor vulputate etiam metus primis, purus convallis orci accumsan sollicitudin dignissim magna fringilla, senectus interdum fusce aenean in montes. Cubilia natoque lacinia imperdiet dui efficitur porttitor nisi, bibendum aptent eu massa consectetur feugiat amet, per commodo dolor nulla duis ante.

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