Comparison of transcatheter aortic valve replacement performed in a hybrid operating room versus a catheterization laboratory
- 1Department of Cardiology, University Hospital of Toulouse, Toulouse, France
Abstract
Introduction: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) can be performed in a catheterization laboratory (cath lab) or in a hybrid operating room (hybrid OR).
Aim: The objective of this study was to compare the safety of patients undergoing TAVR in a hybrid OR with those undergoing TAVR in a cath lab.
Material and methods: The primary endpoint was a composite safety endpoint, which includes freedom from all-cause in-hospital mortality, stroke, major vascular complications (VARC ≥ 2), aortic regurgitation (grade ≥ 2), new pacemaker implantation, emergent surgery, annulus rupture, tamponade, or stent femoral implantation. The two secondary endpoints consisted of technical failure criteria and device failure criteria, at hospital discharge.
Results: A total of 286 patients were included, 143 undergoing TF TAVR in the cath lab and 143 in a hybrid OR. Regarding the safety primary endpoint, there was no significant difference between the groups: 75.3% in the cath lab group versus 71.1% in the hybrid OR group (p = 0.421). There was also no significant difference in the technical failure criteria (3.5% in the cath lab group versus 4.2% in the hybrid OR group; p = 0.758) and device failure criteria (20.6% in the cath lab group versus 17.6% in the hybrid OR group; p = 0.526).
Conclusions: Regarding the composite safety and efficacy endpoints, no statistically significant between-group differences were detected in this unadjusted single-center cohort between patients undergoing TF-TAVR in a cath lab and those treated in a hybrid OR. These data suggest that performing TF TAVR in the cath lab can achieve high safety and effectiveness outcomes.
Related
- Automated phase recognition in the cardiac catheterization laboratory with deep learning.
- Surgical aortic valve replacement-level aortotomy for self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve explantation
- Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance for Transcatheter Pulmonary Valve Replacement: A Feasibility Study.
- Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Pure Native Aortic Regurgitation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Longitudinal Trajectories of the Atherogenic Index of Plasma and Their Associations with Clinical Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
BibTeX
@article{canitrot2026comparison,
title = {{Comparison of transcatheter aortic valve replacement performed in a hybrid operating room versus a catheterization laboratory}},
author = {Ronan Canitrot and Vincent Bataille and Frédéric Bouisset and Francisco Campelo-Parada and Didier Carrié and Thibault Lhermusier and Clément Servoz},
journal = {Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.5114/aic.2026.164554},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13721050},
note = {CC BY-NC-SA},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Comparison of transcatheter aortic valve replacement performed in a hybrid operating room versus a catheterization laboratory
AU - Ronan Canitrot
AU - Vincent Bataille
AU - Frédéric Bouisset
AU - Francisco Campelo-Parada
AU - Didier Carrié
AU - Thibault Lhermusier
AU - Clément Servoz
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/01
JO - Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology
DO - 10.5114/aic.2026.164554
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13721050
AB - Introduction: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) can be performed in a catheterization laboratory (cath lab) or in a hybrid operating room (hybrid OR). Aim: The objective of this study was to compare the safety of patients undergoing TAVR in a hybrid OR with those undergoing TAVR in a cath lab. Material and methods: The primary endpoint was a composite safety endpoint, which includes freedom from all-cause in-hospital mortality, stroke, major vascular complications (VARC ≥ 2), aortic regurgitation (grade ≥ 2), new pacemaker implantation, emergent surgery, annulus rupture, tamponade, or stent femoral implantation. The two secondary endpoints consisted of technical failure criteria and device failure criteria, at hospital discharge. Results: A total of 286 patients were included, 143 undergoing TF TAVR in the cath lab and 143 in a hybrid OR. Regarding the safety primary endpoint, there was no significant difference between the groups: 75.3% in the cath lab group versus 71.1% in the hybrid OR group (p = 0.421). There was also no significant difference in the technical failure criteria (3.5% in the cath lab group versus 4.2% in the hybrid OR group; p = 0.758) and device failure criteria (20.6% in the cath lab group versus 17.6% in the hybrid OR group; p = 0.526). Conclusions: Regarding the composite safety and efficacy endpoints, no statistically significant between-group differences were detected in this unadjusted single-center cohort between patients undergoing TF-TAVR in a cath lab and those treated in a hybrid OR. These data suggest that performing TF TAVR in the cath lab can achieve high safety and effectiveness outcomes.
SN - 1734-9338
SN - 1897-4295
ER -