Propensity-Matched Comparison of Percutaneous Versus Surgical Access for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR)

preprint OA: closed
View at publisher

Abstract

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a proven treatment for severe aortic stenosis (AS). Transfemoral access is the most prevalent method, achieved either surgically or percutaneously. This study compares in-hospital outcomes and length of stay between surgical cut-down and fully percutaneous approaches. Methods: This retrospective, propensity-matched study analyzed medical records of all patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR at our center from January 2019 to December 2023. Outcomes were assessed based on Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) consensus criteria. Results: 251 TAVR patients (77 propensity score matching pairs) were included (55% female) with a median (IQR) age of 80 (11) years. Surgical cut-down showed fewer vascular complications, bleeding, and transfusions. No death, stroke, atrial fibrillation (AF), or need for pacemaker was reported in this group. Fewer mean hospitali-zation days were observed in the total cohort over the years (p< 0.001). This reduction was more pronounced after 2021 when the surgical approach was adopted. Mean hospitalization days were 6.40 ±6.46 for percutaneous and 4.34 ±1.61 for surgical groups (p< 0.001). Conclusions: Surgical cut-down for TAVR femoral access yields superior outcomes and shorter hospital stays compared to fully percutaneous methods.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2024) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00