ESC Heart Failure (Dec 2020)

Safety of transradial and transfemoral left ventricular compared with transfemoral right ventricular endomyocardial biopsy

  • Sebastian Göbel,
  • Sören Schwuchow‐Thonke,
  • Thomas Jansen,
  • Susanne Karbach,
  • Tilman Emrich,
  • Tommaso Gori,
  • Finja Knies,
  • Eberhard Schulz,
  • Thomas Münzel,
  • Karsten Keller,
  • Philip Wenzel

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ehf2.13006
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 7, no. 6
pp. 4015 – 4023

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Aims With the present study, we sought to determine the safety of three different endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) access routes in 514 patients admitted for diagnostic workup of heart failure of unknown aetiology. Methods and results In this retrospective monocentric cohort study, we analysed 514 consecutive patients with heart failure without evidence of significant coronary artery disease or valvular disease undergoing EMB between November 2013 and December 2018, stratified in three access route groups: transradial arterial left ventricular (LV‐)EMB (323 patients), transfemoral LV‐EMB (138 patients), and transfemoral right ventricular (RV‐)EMB (53 patients). Patients undergoing selective transradial LV‐EMB were older compared with patients undergoing selective transfemoral LV‐EMB or RV‐EMB [transradial LV‐EMB: 56.0 (45.0/64.0) vs. transfemoral LV‐EMB: 53 (42.5/64.5), P = 0.455; transradial LV‐EMB: 56 (45.0/64.0) vs. RV‐EMB: 53 (42.5/64), P = 0.695] and presented more often in New York Heart Association‐functional class III and IV. A total of eight major complications including permanent atrioventricular block requiring pacemaker implantation, pericardial tamponade necessitating pericardiocentesis, stroke and transient cerebral ischaemic attack as well as severe valvular damage, vascular access site complications, and ventricular fibrillation were documented with no significant differences between the groups (8/514, 1.5%). Minor complications such as transient chest pain, non‐sustained electrocardiogram abnormalities, and transient atrioventricular block were rare and equally distributed between groups. Conclusions Transradial LV‐EMB is a safe procedure for experienced radial operators and non‐inferior compared with transfemoral LV‐EMB and RV‐EMB. An accurate peri‐procedural and post‐procedural monitoring and follow‐up care should be recommended for all patients undergoing this procedure in order to identify potential complications.

Keywords