Comparison of Outcomes of Transfemoral Versus Transapical Approach for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Post hoc analyses of clinical trials have shown superior outcomes for a transfemoral (TF) compared with a transapical (TA) approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). There are few contemporary data on utilization and outcomes of TF versus TA TAVI in real-world patient populations. Using the National Inpatient Sample 2011 to 2014, we identified TF-TAVI and TA-TAVI procedures using ICD-9 procedure codes 35.05 and 35.06, respectively. A propensity-matched cohort of TF and TA TAVI procedures balanced on 23 baseline characteristics was assembled. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), AKI requiring dialysis (AKI-D) and postoperative stroke. A total of 7,973 TAVI procedures representative of 39,745 procedures nationally were included in the study. Of these, 80.2% were performed using a TF approach while 19.8% used a TA approach. Patients in the TF-TAVI group were older (mean age 81.7 vs 80.4 years, p < 0.001), with a higher prevalence of heart failure (12.7% vs 7.6%, p < 0.001) and lower prevalence of peripheral vascular disease (28.0% vs 35.5%, p < 0.001) compared with the TA-TAVI group. In 1,576 propensity-matched pairs of TF-TAVI and TA-TAVI procedures, TF-TAVI was associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42 to 0.88, p = 0.01), lower rates of AKI (0.53, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.63, p < 0.001), similar rates of AKI-D (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.38, p = 0.38) and postoperative stroke (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.10, p = 0.56) compared with TA-TAVI. In conclusion, TF-TAVI is associated with lower rates of in-hospital mortality and AKI compared with TA-TAVI. A TF approach should be preferred over a TA approach for TAVI whenever possible. Post hoc analyses of clinical trials have shown superior outcomes for a transfemoral (TF) compared with a transapical (TA) approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). There are few contemporary data on utilization and outcomes of TF versus TA TAVI in real-world patient populations. Using the National Inpatient Sample 2011 to 2014, we identified TF-TAVI and TA-TAVI procedures using ICD-9 procedure codes 35.05 and 35.06, respectively. A propensity-matched cohort of TF and TA TAVI procedures balanced on 23 baseline characteristics was assembled. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), AKI requiring dialysis (AKI-D) and postoperative stroke. A total of 7,973 TAVI procedures representative of 39,745 procedures nationally were included in the study. Of these, 80.2% were performed using a TF approach while 19.8% used a TA approach. Patients in the TF-TAVI group were older (mean age 81.7 vs 80.4 years, p < 0.001), with a higher prevalence of heart failure (12.7% vs 7.6%, p < 0.001) and lower prevalence of peripheral vascular disease (28.0% vs 35.5%, p < 0.001) compared with the TA-TAVI group. In 1,576 propensity-matched pairs of TF-TAVI and TA-TAVI procedures, TF-TAVI was associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42 to 0.88, p = 0.01), lower rates of AKI (0.53, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.63, p < 0.001), similar rates of AKI-D (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.38, p = 0.38) and postoperative stroke (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.10, p = 0.56) compared with TA-TAVI. In conclusion, TF-TAVI is associated with lower rates of in-hospital mortality and AKI compared with TA-TAVI. A TF approach should be preferred over a TA approach for TAVI whenever possible.