LAUSR

OBJECTIVES Transaortic (TAo) access for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an alternative to the conventional transfemoral or transapical routes. Data comparing the characteristics and outcomes of TAo-TAVI using the SAPIEN XT and SAPIEN 3 heart valves are scarce. The objective of the current analysis was to provide such information. METHODS ROUTE is an international, prospective, observational registry. Patients with severe calcific aortic stenosis scheduled for TAo-TAVI with an Edwards SAPIEN XT or a SAPIEN 3 heart valve were consecutively enrolled at 22 centres across Europe between February 2013 and February 2015. Periprocedural, in-hospital and 30-day complication rates were assessed. RESULTS Of the 301 patients included, 126 (41.9%) received a SAPIEN 3 and 175 (58.1%) a SAPIEN XT. The SAPIEN 3 was associated with shorter procedure time (101 ± 35 vs 111 ± 40 min; P = 0.031) and a lower quantity of contrast agent used (87 ± 43 vs 112 ± 50 ml; P < 0.001). Balloon dilation was performed less often before (68.0% vs 78.3%; P = 0.045) and after implantation (13.6% vs 30.1%; P = 0.001). No statistically significant differences between the valve types were documented for overall (4.1% SAPIEN 3 vs 7.6% SAPIEN XT; P = 0.21), TAVI-related (0.8% vs 4.7%; P = 0.084) and cardiovascular mortality (2.4% vs 5.9%; P = 0.158). Major vascular complications were less frequent (0.8% vs 5.3%; P = 0.049), and there was a lower rate of moderate-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation (0.8% vs 5.1%; P = 0.050) in the SAPIEN 3 group. CONCLUSIONS Both the SAPIEN XT and SAPIEN 3 were safely implanted via the TAo route, though the SAPIEN 3 may be associated with a higher procedural success rate and improved prognosis. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01991431.