Evaluation of carotid artery access in comparison with femoral artery access in neonatal percutaneous stenting of ductus arteriosus

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Gehan A. Alsawah ◽  
Hala Elmarsafawy ◽  
Mona Hafez ◽  
Shaimaa Rakha

Abstract Background: Patent ductus arteriosus stenting in duct-dependent pulmonary circulation is a challenging procedure. Percutaneous carotid artery access for ductal stenting has proven to be feasible; however, comparison with femoral artery access in terms of procedure details and complications either immediate or late is scarce. Therefore, we evaluated carotid artery access in comparison with femoral artery for stenting of patent ductus arteriosus. Methods: Forty neonates were reviewed, 20 were stented via carotid artery access, and 20 via the traditional femoral artery access. Comparison variables were neonatal demographics at the procedure, angiographic ductal anatomy, procedure details, and immediate complications. Follow-up Doppler ultrasound on access site was performed to document late complications. Results: Median age of included cases was 10.5 (3–28) days with complex ductal anatomy more frequently accessed via carotid artery than femoral. Immediate access-related complications were significantly higher with femoral than carotid artery access; 9 (45%) versus 3 (15%) respectively, p = 0.038. With carotid access, we had only one case with small pseudoaneurysm and acute hemiparesis 3 days after the procedure. Delayed local complications were more common with femoral access (15%) than carotid access (5%), mild stenosis in one case, and severe in another with femoral access; while with transcarotid arterial access, only one case had mild narrowing. Conclusion: Percutaneous carotid artery access in neonates is a more convenient approach for patent ductus arteriosus stenting especially with complex ductal anatomy. Moreover, local complications are limited and vascular patency is better preserved, in comparison with trans-femoral arterial access. However, the potential for neurological adverse events should not be overlooked.

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanjeev H. Naganur ◽  
C. R. Pruthvi ◽  
Dinakar Bootla ◽  
Krishna Prasad ◽  
V. Krishna Santosh ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Salem Deraz ◽  
Mohamed Tawfik ◽  
Susy Kotit ◽  
Abdelrahman Elafifi

Abstract Introduction: The standard transcatheter technique to profile the patent ductus arteriosus requires arterial access through the femoral artery and is associated with arterial complications, longer fluoroscopic time, contrast volume, and longer hospital stay. Aim of the study: To compare exclusive transvenous access with the standard procedures for patent ductus arteriosus closure and evaluate whether exclusive venous approach is a safe and effective alternative. Methods: A total of 320 patients were included. A detailed echocardiographic evaluation of the duct morphology was performed. Patients were classified into group 1 included patients who underwent exclusive femoral venous access, without any injections of contrast media and group 2 included patients who underwent arterial and venous access. Results: Arterial access was achieved in 210 (65.6%). Successful closure of patent ductus arteriosus was achieved in 109 (99.1%) patients in group 1 and in 203 (96.7%) patients in group 2. The patent ductus arteriosus was large and was referred for surgical closure in one patient from group 1 and 7 patients from group 2. Residual patent ductus arteriosus was seen in 6 cases from group 1 (5.4%) and 12 patients from group 2 (5.7%). None of the cases in group 1 had vascular complications, while vascular complications were seen in 20 cases, all of them in group 2 (9.5%). Nonvascular complications were seen in one patient from group 1 (0.9%) and 15 patients in group 2 (7.1%). The procedure time and fluoroscopy times were less in patients with exclusive transvenous access. Conclusion: Patent ductus arteriosus device closure without arterial access can be accomplished safely and effectively.


2013 ◽  
Vol 65 (5) ◽  
pp. 546-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaurav Garg ◽  
Anurakti Srivastava ◽  
Himanshu Tyagi ◽  
Sridhar P. Reddy ◽  
Anil Sivadasan Radha

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document