Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2016; 64(05): 374-381
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1555606
Original Cardiovascular
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Transfemoral versus Transapical Aortic Implantation for Aortic Stenosis Based on No Significant Difference in Logistic EuroSCORE: A Meta-Analysis

Zhifang Liu
1  Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Zhejiang Hospital, Hangzhou, People's Republic of China
,
Renliang He
1  Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Zhejiang Hospital, Hangzhou, People's Republic of China
,
Canghao Wu
1  Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Zhejiang Hospital, Hangzhou, People's Republic of China
,
Yu Xia
1  Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Zhejiang Hospital, Hangzhou, People's Republic of China
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

07 August 2014

18 May 2015

Publication Date:
29 June 2015 (online)

Abstract

Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has gained increasing acceptance for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). The present meta-analysis was performed to assess if the transapical (TA) approach has any benefit in reduction of mortality and complications relative to the transfemoral (TF) approach for patients with AS.

Methods All relevant studies comparing TF-TAVI and TA-TAVI from January 2002 to November 2013 were retrieved from Medline and Embase databases. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the difference between two groups. Heterogeneity assumption was assessed by an I 2 test. The random-effect model or fixed-effect model was used to estimate summary effect based on I 2 test.

Results Nine studies conformed to the predefined criteria, including 666 patients in the TF-TAVI group and 457 patients in the TA-TAVI group. No difference was found in all-cause mortality at 30 days and beyond 1 year between the two groups (30 days: 9.2% versus 11.4%; RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.11; p = 0.14 and beyond 1 year: RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.56; p = 0.86). There was a trend toward increased incidence of stroke in patients in the TF-TAVI group (4.7% versus 2.6%; RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.75 to 3.58; p = 0.21), and the incidence of vascular complication and postoperative heart block were significantly increased in patients having TF-TAVI (vascular complications: 14.7% versus 7.1%; RR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.15 to 3.61; p = 0.01 and heart block: 13.4% versus 4.6%; RR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.10 to 5.83; p = 0.03). Additionally, more patients in the TF-TAVI group required permanent pacemaker relative to the TA-TAVI group (10.8% versus 3.4%; RR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.41 to 5.32; p = 0.003).

Conclusions Among patients with AS with no significant difference in logistic EuroSCORE, TA-TAVI has a lower risk of vascular complication and postoperative heart block but a similar incidence of stroke and mortality compared with TF-TAVI. Accordingly, TA approach is a promising and feasible option for the patients with severe AS.