Skip to main content
. 2012 Jul;1(2):216–219. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2225-319X.2012.07.10

Table 1. A comparison between transfemoral and transapical aortic valve implantation.

Transfemoral (TF) Transapical (TA)
Access Femoral artery Left ventricular apex
Access mode Retrograde Antegrade
Incision length [cm] 1-2 ~5
Distance to aortic valve [cm] ~70-100 ~7-10
Wire insertion Through the aortic arch, retrograde Through the aortic arch, antegrade
Wire positioning Arbitrary, across iliac vessels and aortic arch, irregularities, slack Coaxial, straight
Valve insertion Through the aortic arch, retrograde No touch aorta
Valve orientation Arbitrary Commissural (anatomical) alignment possible
Valve implantation Some mobility during implantation Little mobility, stepwise and controlled implantation usually feasible
Application system retrieval Across the aortic arch, relatively long distance Direct and straight
Access closure Complication rates as high as 10% Very low complication rate, ~1%
Perspectives Smaller systems will become available Allows access to almost any diameter of the devices – this may lead to potentially better tissue longevity
Future developments Improved vascular closure systems Percutaneous access and closure systems