Outcome of patients undergoing TAVR with and without the attendance of an anesthesiologist

Trends in transcatheter aortic valve implantation practice and clinical outcomes at an Irish tertiary referral centre

OBJECTIVE

A paucity of data exists on how transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) practice has evolved in Ireland. This study sought to analyse temporal trends in patient demographics, procedural characteristics, and clinical outcomes at an Irish tertiary referral centre.

METHODS

The prospective Mater TAVI database was divided into time tertiles based on when TAVI was performed: Group A, November 2008-April 2013; Group B, April 2013-September 2017; and Group C, September 2017-February 2022. Patient and procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared across groups.

RESULTS

A total of 1063 (Group A, 59; Group B, 268; and Group C:, 736) patients were treated with TAVI during the study period (mean age 81.1±7.4, mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 5.9±5.1).Conscious sedation (Group A, 0%; Group B, 59.9%; and Group C, 90.2%, p<0.001) and femoral artery access (Group A, 76.3%; Group B, 90.7%; and Group C, 96.6%, p<0.001) were used more frequently over time. The median length of hospital stay reduced from 9 days (IQR 7, 18) in Group A to 2 days (IQR 2, 3) in Group C. In-hospital death was numerically higher in Group A compared with Group C (6.8% vs 1.9%, p=0.078). At 1-year follow-up, the rate of death and/or stroke was similar in Group A and Group C (20.3% vs 12.0%, adjusted HR 1.49, 95% CI (0.59 to 3.74)).

CONCLUSION

There was exponential growth in TAVI procedural volume during the study period. A minimalist approach to TAVI emerged, and this was associated with significantly shorter procedure duration and hospital stay. Clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up did not change significantly over time.

Optimizing Anesthetic Selection in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Striking a Delicate Balance between Efficacy and Minimal Intervention

Patients with severe calcific native aortic valve stenosis (AS) who require valve replacement have two options, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). TAVR was approved in late 2011 for extremely high-risk patients and was subsequently approved for high-risk (2012), intermediate-risk (2016), and low-risk (2019) patients. In 2019, TAVR procedures surpassed SAVR procedures for the first time in the United States. The approach to anesthesia for this procedure has also evolved. Initially, general anesthesia (GA) was preferred, but currently, conscious sedation (CS) is favored. This review aims to clarify the indications and contraindications for both approaches, as well as the advantages of one approach over the other. Recent studies show that conscious sedation has better outcomes in terms of all-cause mortality, procedure complications such as stroke, myocardial infarction, infection requiring antibiotics, acute kidney injury, and the need for inotropes or vasopressors.

Prophylactic Awake Peripheral V-A ECMO during TAVR

INTRODUCTION

TAVR remains a complex procedure that may result in serious intraprocedural complications. In many of these circumstances, venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) helps to manage complications, provides a hemodynamic back-up, and bridges to an emergency open heart surgery. The clinical outcomes of 27 patients who underwent prophylactic implantation of peripheral V-A ECMO (pV-A ECMO) during high-risk transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) cases are described.

METHODS

From June 2012 to October 2022, 590 consecutive patients underwent TAVR at our center. Of these, 27 patients (4.5%) underwent TAVR with pV-AECMO because they were deemed very high risk for periprocedural complications and formed the study population.

RESULTS

There were no pV-A ECMO, hemodynamic or TAVR implantation complications. Decannulation of the ECMO system was performed in 92.6% of cases at the end of the procedure in the hybrid-operating theatre. The mean duration of pV-A ECMO for procedure support was 51.4 ± 10.3 min. There were no ECMO-related vascular or bleeding complications.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the prophylactic placement of awake peripheral V-A ECMO provides excellent temporary cardio-circulatory and pulmonary support during very high-risk TAVR procedures.

Comparison of Safety and Effectiveness of Local or General Anesthesia after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

It remains controversial to choose anesthesia for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). A meta-analysis of cohort studies was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of local anesthesia (LA) compared to general anesthesia (GA) in TAVI. All relevant studies published from 1 January 2002, to 31 June 2022, were searched in Ovid, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. A total of 34 studies involving 23,480 patients were included in the meta-analysis. TAVI with LA was associated with a significant reduction in hospital stay [WMD = −2.48, 95% CI (−2.80, −2.16), p < 0.00001], operative [WMD = −12.25, 95% CI (−13.73, −10.78), p < 0.00001] and fluoroscopy time [WMD = −3.30, 95% CI (−5.40, −1.19), p = 0.002], and an increased risk of acute kidney injury [OR = 1.31, 95% CI (1.01, 1.69), p = 0.04] and a reduced incidence of major bleeding [OR = 0.59, 95% CI (0.46, 0.75), p < 0.0001] and the use of cardiovascular drugs [OR = 0.17, 95% CI (0.05, 0.57), p = 0.004]. No differences were found between LA and GA for 30-day mortality, procedural success rate, myocardial infarction, permanent pacemaker implantation, paravalvular leak, shock, and cerebrovascular events. Overall, 4.4% of LA converted to GA. Based on current evidence, our results suggested that LA strategies reduced hospital stay, operative time, fluoroscopy time, cardiovascular drug consumption, and major bleeding rates in patients undergoing TAVI but led to increased acute kidney injury rates. Further studies and randomized trials are required to verify the presented findings and to identify patients who might benefit from LA.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with or without anesthesiologist: results from a high-volume single center

AIMS

Local instead of general anesthesia has become the standard approach in many centers for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). New generation devices and an increase in operator skills had led to a drastic reduction in periprocedural complications, bringing in the adoption of a minimalist approach. In our study, we aimed to compare patients treated with TAVR under local anesthesia with or without the presence of an anesthesiologist on site (AOS).

METHODS

We compare procedural aspects and results of patients treated with TAVR with an AOS against patients treated with TAVR with an anesthesiologist on call (AOC). From January 2019 to December 2020, all consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR with either the self-expandable Evolut (Medtronic, MN, USA) or balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (Edwards Lifesciences, CA, USA) were collected.

RESULTS

Of 332 patients collected, 96 (29%) were treated with TAVR with AOS, while 236 (71%) were treated with TAVR with AOC. No differences in procedural time, fluoroscopy time and amount of contrast medium were observed. No procedural death and conversion to open-chest surgery was reported. The rate of stroke/transient ischemic attacks and major vascular complications was similar in the two groups. No patients in both groups required conversion to general anesthesia. Two patients (0.8%) in the AOC group required urgent intervention of the anesthesiologist. In the AOC group, there was a greater use of morphine (55.9% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.008), but with a lower dose for each patient (2.0 vs. 2.8 mg, P = 0.006). On the other hand, there was a lower use of other painkiller drugs (3.4% vs. 20.8%, P = 0.001). No difference in inotropic drugs use was observed.

CONCLUSION

In patients at low or intermediate risk undergoing transfemoral TAVR, a safe procedure can be performed under local anesthesia without the presence of an anesthesiologist in the catheterization laboratory.

Update on Minimalist TAVR Care Pathways: Approaches to Care in 2022

Purpose of Review

This review summarizes current data supporting a minimalist TAVR approach and identifies the need for additional study to optimize TAVR care. The authors discuss future directions of the TAVR landscape and how this necessitates evolution of minimalist care pathways.

Recent Findings

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a mainstay in the treatment of aortic stenosis since the initial procedure in 2002. Recently, attention has shifted to TAVR optimization and the minimalist approach with a focus on minimizing procedural sedation, protocolization of perioperative management, and prioritization on early discharge. This approach has been shown to be safe and reduce procedure time, length of stay, and overall cost for hospital systems.

Summary

The minimalist care pathway avoids general anesthesia, shortens procedure time and length of stay, and reduces cost without changing mortality or readmission rates at 30 days. A variety of protocols have been proposed without a clear consensus on specific components or patient eligibility. There is a continued need for data regarding patient risk stratification, valve selection, and discharge strategy as TAVR becomes increasingly common.

OUP accepted manuscript

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become a high-volume procedure with increasing demands on hospital resources. Local anaesthesia with sedation supervised by an anaesthesiology team is the current standard of care. We aimed to describe our experience with a simplified, nurse-led sedation (NLS) protocol. This study enrolled 128 consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI with self-expandable Evolut R prosthesis between November 2019 and April 2021. Operators selected 50% of patients for NLS based on the clinical expectation of lower risk of procedural difficulties. Nurse-led sedation protocol demanded only mild to moderate levels of sedation. The clinical outcomes were determined from the local TAVI registry and the national mortality database. Baseline patient characteristics were similar in the NLS (n = 64) and anaesthesiologist-led sedation (ALS) (n = 64) groups except higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus (48.4% vs. 31.3%, P = 0.035) and peripheral vascular disease (20.3% vs. 7.8%, P = 0.036) in the ALS group. There was a trend for the larger prostheses used in the ALS group (P = 0.058). The procedural results did not differ, and coronary care team backup was rarely needed in the NLS group (6% of patients). The in-hospital outcomes were identical from both clinical and echocardiography perspectives, and 30-day mortality was low in both groups (1.5%). For the NLS group, preparation in the catheterization laboratory was quicker by 6.4 min (P = 0.01), and intensive care unit stay was shorter (2.03 vs. 3.48 days, P = 0.001). In conclusion, the NLS for the selected transfemoral TAVI population seems safe.

Single-center experience of 105-minimalistc transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement and its outcome

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) increases worldwide, and indications expand from high-risk aortic stenosis patients to low-risk aortic stenosis. Studies have shown that minimalistic TAVR done under conscious sedation is safe and effective. We report single-operator, the single-center outcome of 105 minimalist transfemoral, conscious sedation TAVR patients, analyzed retrospectively.

METHODS

All patients underwent TAVR in cardiac catheterization lab via percutaneous transfemoral, conscious sedation approach. A dedicated cardiac anesthetist team delivered the conscious sedation with a standard protocol described in the main text. The outcomes were analyzed as per VARC-2 criteria and compared with the latest low-risk TAVR trials.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement between July 2016 to February 2020. The mean age of the population was 73 years, and the mean STS score was 3.99 ± 2.59. All patients underwent a percutaneous transfemoral approach. Self-expanding valve was used in 40% of cases and balloon-expandable valve in 60% (Sapien3™ in 31% and MyVal™ in 29%) of cases. One patient required conversion to surgical aortic valve replacement. The success rate was 99 percent. The outcomes were: all-cause mortality: 0.9%, stroke rate 1.9%, New pacemaker rate 5.7%, 87.6% had no paravalvular leak. The mild and moderate paravalvular leak was seen in 2.8% and 1.9%, respectively. The mean gradient decreased from 47.5 mmHg to 9 mmHg. The average ICU stay was 26.4 h, and the average hospital stay was 5.4 days. Our outcomes are comparable with the latest published low-risk trial.

CONCLUSION

Minimalist, conscious sedation, transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement when done following a standard protocol is safe and effective.

Update on Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a minimally invasive approach to treat symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. The patient populations that have been shown to benefit from this procedure continue to grow with time. Techniques and technology in TAVR persistently advance with a continued trend toward improved outcomes for patients. In this review, we highlight the advances in vascular access, TAVR valve design, progress in reducing procedural complications, and emerging evidence in the field.

Future Directions. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation for Low-risk Patients: Inevitable Evolution or a Step Too Far?

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has become the treatment of choice for inoperable and high-risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis, and is becoming more and more common as the first choice for intermediate-risk patients as well. The next step in this evolution would be the expansion of treatment indications to low-risk patients. Successful treatment of this patient population will require setting new standards in terms of clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness. In this review, we present the main challenges that need to be addressed before transcatheter aortic valve replacement can be applied as a standard treatment for low-risk patients.

In-hospital outcomes after emergency or prophylactic veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a comprehensive review of the literature

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) has been used to deal with life-threatening complications as well as back-up or active cardiovascular support during high-risk procedures in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). PubMed and MEDLINE electronic databases were searched in order to identify studies with emergency or prophylactic V-A ECMO application in association with TAVI procedures. From November 2012 to November 2017, 14 relevant studies were identified that included 5,115 TAVI patients of whom 102 (2%) required V-A ECMO (22 prophylactically, 66 as an emergency and 14 without a reported indication). The reason for emergency V-A ECMO institution was detailed in 64 patients: left ventricle free wall rupture (n = 14), haemodynamic instability (n = 12), ventricular arrhythmias (n = 7), aortic annulus rupture (n = 6), coronary obstruction (n = 6), low left ventricular output (ejection fraction <35%) (n = 5), uncontrollable bleeding (n = 5), severe aortic regurgitation (n = 4), prosthesis embolisation (n = 3), aortic dissection (n = 1) and respiratory failure (n = 1). Femoral arterial and vein cannulation was the most common access technique for V-A ECMO institution. Major bleeding (n = 7) and vascular access complications (n = 7) were reported after ECMO institution. The overall in-hospital survival was 73% (61% in the emergency vs. 100% in the prophylactic group). V-A ECMO support should be available at any centre performing TAVI and provides effective mechanical circulatory support in an emergency setting. We present an algorithm to aid decisions about prophylactic circulatory assistance with V-A ECMO and it should form part of the heart team discussion before a TAVI procedure is undertaken.

Role of Echocardiography in Transcatheter Valvular Heart Disease Interventions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Transcatheter valvular interventions have increased in importance and utility for surgical valve repair and replacement. Cardiac imaging is the most crucial aspect of procedural planning and guidance. Echocardiography is a widely used, portable, and dynamic imaging modality used for many of these interventions. This review will summarize the role echocardiography in structural heart valvular interventions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Intraprocedural echocardiographic guidance has been a mainstay of structural heart interventions. Over the years, the use of 3-dimensional echocardiography has increased, and studies have shown utility in paravalvular leak prediction in the setting of transcatheter aortic valve replacement, procedural guidance in MitraClip repair, and in mitral and tricuspid valve therapies. Intraprocedural echocardiography is of paramount important for procedural success during all structural heart valvular interventions. Continued use of 2 and 3-dimensional echocardiography will be a major factor in driving the innovative field of structural heart interventions forward.