Outcome After General Anesthesia Versus Monitored Anesthesia Care in Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Sedation versus general anesthesia on all-cause mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The comparison between sedation and general anesthesia (GA) in terms of all-cause mortality remains a subject of ongoing debate. The primary objective of our study was to investigate the impact of GA and sedation on all-cause mortality in order to provide clarity on this controversial topic.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, incorporating cohort studies and RCTs about postoperative all-cause mortality. Comprehensive searches were performed in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, with the search period extending until February 28, 2023. Two independent reviewers extracted the relevant information, including the number of deaths, survivals, and risk effect values at various time points following surgery, and these data were subsequently pooled and analyzed using a random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 58 studies were included in the analysis, with a majority focusing on endovascular surgery. The findings of our analysis indicated that, overall, and in most subgroup analyses, sedation exhibited superiority over GA in terms of in-hospital and 30-day mortality. However, no significant difference was observed in subgroup analyses specific to cerebrovascular surgery. About 90-day mortality, the majority of studies centered around cerebrovascular surgery. Although the overall pooled results showed a difference between sedation and GA, no distinction was observed between the pooled ORs and the subgroup analyses based on RCTs and matched cohort studies. For one-year all-cause mortality, all included studies focused on cardiac and macrovascular surgery. No difference was found between the HRs and the results derived from RCTs and matched cohort studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggested a potential superiority of sedation over GA, particularly in the context of cardiac and macrovascular surgery, mitigating the risk of in-hospital and 30-day death. However, for the longer postoperative periods, this difference remains uncertain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023399151; registered 24 February 2023.

The association between different anesthetic techniques and outcomes in patients undergoing transfemoral aortic valve replacement

Background

There is an increasing number of patients undergoing transfemoral aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with sedation. There is limited data assessing the efficacy and safety of the different types of sedative drugs. The objective was to compare two sedation techniques with regard to the need for vasoactive support, respiratory support, rate of conversion to general anesthesia (GA), common perioperative morbidities, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and in-hospital mortality.

Methods

A retrospective chart review study conducted among patients who underwent TAVR at a specialized cardiac center between January 2016 and December 2019. Data collection included patient diagnosis, preoperative comorbidities, intraoperative outcomes, and postoperative outcomes.

Results

A total of 289 patients received local anesthesia; 210 received propofol infusion and 79 received a mixed propofol-ketamine infusion (Ketofol). The average age was 75.5 ± 8.9 years and 58.1% of the patients were females. Comparing propofol and ketofol groups, 31.2% and 34.2% of the patients required drug support, 7.6% and 6.3% required conversion to GA, 46.7% and 59.5% required respiratory support, respectively. These intraoperative outcomes were not significantly different between groups, P = 0.540, P = 0.707, and P = 0.105, respectively. In-hospital 30-day mortality in propofol and ketofol groups were 1.9% and 3.8%, respectively, P = 0.396. In both groups, the median post-procedure coronary care unit stay was 26 hours while post-procedure hospital stay was 3 days.

Conclusions

There were no significant differences in perioperative or postoperative outcomes in TAVR patients receiving either propofol or ketofol. Propofol infusion, either alone or with ketamine, is reliable and safe, with minimal side effects.

Local versus General Anaesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomised and Propensity-Score Matched Studies

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a common practice for severe aortic stenosis, but the choice between general (GA) and local anesthesia (LA) remains uncertain. We conducted a comprehensive literature review until April 2023, comparing the safety and efficacy of LA versus GA in TAVI procedures. Our findings indicate significant advantages of LA, including lower 30-day mortality rates (RR: 0.69; 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]; p < 0.001), shorter in-hospital stays (mean difference: -0.91 days; 95% CI [-1.63, -0.20]; p = 0.01), reduced bleeding/transfusion incidents (RR: 0.64; 95% CI [0.48, 0.85]; p < 0.01), and fewer respiratory complications (RR: 0.56; 95% CI [0.42, 0.76], p<0.01). Other operative outcomes were comparable. Our findings reinforce prior evidence, presenting a compelling case for LA's safety and efficacy. While patient preferences and clinical nuances must be considered, our study propels the discourse towards a more informed anaesthesia approach for TAVI procedures.

Monitored Anesthesia Care for Axillary Impella 5.5 Placement: A Feasible Option for Patients With Severe Cardiogenic Shock With Relative Contraindication to Intubation

The Impella 5.5 left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is typically placed in a hybrid operating room with fluoroscopic and echocardiographic guidance under general anesthesia. In this case report, we describe a patient with severe cardiopulmonary failure necessitating an Impella 5.5 as a bridge to heart/lung transplant. Here, we describe the successful placement of the Impella 5.5 with sedation and local anesthesia in order to avoid general anesthesia and the sequelae of positive pressure ventilation in a fragile patient. Impella placement was confirmed with transesophageal echocardiography. This case report demonstrates a novel strategy for placing the Impella 5.5 and, more importantly, opens the possibility to future prospective studies of this technique.

Conscious sedation/monitored anesthesia care versus general anesthesia in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A meta-analysis

Background

To compare the merits and safety between conscious sedation/monitored anesthesia (CS/MAC) and general anesthesia (GA) for patients receiving transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Measurements

Databases including EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to October 2022 to identify studies investigating the impact of CS/MAC on peri-procedural and prognostic outcomes compared to those with GA. The primary outcome was the association of CS/MAC with the risk of 30-day mortality, while secondary outcomes included the risks of adverse peri-procedural (e.g., vasopressor/inotropic support) and post-procedural (e.g., stroke) outcomes. Subgroup analysis was performed based on study design [i.e., cohort vs. matched cohort/randomized controlled trials (RCTs)].

Main results

Twenty-four studies (observational studies, n = 22; RCTs, n = 2) involving 141,965 patients were analyzed. Pooled results revealed lower risks of 30-day mortality [odd ratios (OR) = 0.66, p < 0.00001, 139,731 patients, certainty of evidence (COE): low], one-year mortality (OR = 0.72, p = 0.001, 4,827 patients, COE: very low), major bleeding (OR = 0.61, p = 0.01, 6,888 patients, COE: very low), acute kidney injury (OR = 0.71, p = 0.01, 7,155 patients, COE: very low), vasopressor/inotropic support (OR = 0.25, p < 0.00001, 133,438 patients, COE: very low), shorter procedure time (MD = -12.27 minutes, p = 0.0006, 17,694 patients, COE: very low), intensive care unit stay (mean difference(MD) = -7.53 h p = 0.04, 7,589 patients, COE: very low), and hospital stay [MD = -0.84 days, p < 0.00001, 19,019 patients, COE: very low) in patients receiving CS/MAC compared to those undergoing GA without significant differences in procedure success rate, risks of cardiac-vascular complications (e.g., myocardial infarction) and stroke. The pooled conversion rate was 3.1%. Results from matched cohort/RCTs suggested an association of CS/MAC use with a shorter procedural time and hospital stay, and a lower risk of vasopressor/inotropic support.

Conclusion

Compared with GA, our results demonstrated that the use of CS/MAC may be feasible and safe in patients receiving TAVR. However, more evidence is needed to support our findings because of our inclusion of mostly retrospective studies.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022367417.

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.

Propofol Versus Remifentanil Sedation for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Single Academic Center Experience

OBJECTIVE

Comparison of remifentanil versus propofol for sedation during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures to analyze the risk of sedation-related hypoxemia and hypotension. Secondary outcomes included the rate of conversion to general anesthesia, procedure length, rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, and 30-day mortality.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

A single tertiary teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred fifty-nine patients who had propofol or remifentanil sedation for TAVR between March 2017 and March 2020.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

There were 130 patients (50.2%) in the propofol cohort and 129 patients (49.8%) in the remifentanil cohort. The primary outcomes were oxygen saturation nadir values and vasopressor infusion use. Remifentanil was associated with a lower oxygen saturation nadir, as compared to propofol (91.3% v . 95.4%, p < 0.001). Risk factors associated with hypoxemia (defined as <92%) were body mass index (p = 0.0004), obstructive sleep apnea (p = 0.004), and remifentanil maintenance (p < 0.001). Vasopressor infusion use was significantly higher with propofol (64.9% v . 8.5%, p < 0.001). Propofol maintenance and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor-blocker use were the only variables identified as risk factors for vasopressor use (p < 0.001 and p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients undergoing TAVR with conscious sedation, remifentanil was associated with more hypoxemia while propofol was associated with a higher rate of vasopressor use.

Ketamine for Monitored Anesthesia Care during Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

PURPOSE

To study the feasibility and outcomes of ketamine as an anesthetic adjunct during monitored anesthesia care (MAC) in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

METHODS

Data from 155 consecutive TAVR patients at a tertiary care high-volume TAVR medical center were reviewed and analyzed.

FINDINGS

Among the 155 TAVR cases under MAC, intravenous ketamine was administered as an adjunct in 126 patients. The most common ketamine dose was 20 mg. There was no significant difference for postoperative stroke, intraoperative conversion to general anesthesia, postoperative delirium, need for permanent pacemaker implantation, perivalvular leak and length of stay between the ketamine and non-ketamine groups. The ketamine group demonstrated a statistically significant lower 30-day mortality (P = .0381) and intraoperative cardiac arrest (P = .0025) rate when compared to the nonketamine group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated that employing ketamine as an adjunct during MAC for TAVR is a feasible option.

Postoperative Pulmonary Complications after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation under Monitored Anesthesia Care versus General Anesthesia: Retrospective Analysis at a Single Large Volume Center

Few studies to date have assessed the postoperative pulmonary complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) according to the anesthesia method. The present study aims to compare the effects of general anesthesia (GA) or monitored anesthesia care (MAC) on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing TAVI. This retrospective cohort study included 578 patients who underwent TAVI through the trans-femoral approach between August 2011 and May 2019 at a single tertiary academic center. The primary outcome was postoperative pulmonary complications, which were defined as the occurrence of one or more pulmonary complications, such as respiratory failure, respiratory infection, and radiologic findings, within 7 days after TAVI. Secondary outcomes included postoperative delirium, all-cause 30-day mortality rate, 30-day readmission rate, reoperation rate, vascular complications, permanent pacemaker/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator insertion, length of stay in the ICU, hospital stay, and incidence of stroke. Of the 589 patients, 171 underwent TAVI under general anesthesia (GA), and 418 under monitored anesthesia care (MAC). The incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications was significantly higher in the GA than in the MAC group (17.0% vs. 5.3%, p < 0.001). Anesthetic method significantly affected the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications, but not of delirium. ICU stay was significantly shorter in the MAC group, as were operation time, the volume of fluid administered during surgery, heparin dose, transfusion, and inotrope requirements. TAVI under MAC can increase the efficiency of medical resources, reducing the lengths of ICU stay and the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications, compared with TAVI under GA.

Development of the Minimalist Approach for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center

OBJECTIVES

While a minimalist transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) approach has shown safety and efficacy at civilian hospitals, limited data exist regarding developing this approach at Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers (VAMCs). We implemented TAVR with minimalist approach (MA) using conscious sedation (CS) with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and compared safety and outcomes with general anesthesia (GA) with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) at a university-affiliated VAMC.

METHODS

A total of 258 patients underwent transfemoral TAVR at a VAMC between November 2013 and October 2019. Ninety-three patients underwent GA/TEE and 165 patients underwent CS/TTE with dexmedetomidine and remifentanil. Propensity-score matching with nearest-neighbor matching was used to account for baseline differences, yielding 227 participants (81 GA, 146 CS).

RESULTS

MA-TAVR had no effect on 30-day mortality or paravalvular leakage. No differences were found in permanent pacemaker implantation, major vascular complications, or postoperative hemodynamics. In this population, MA-TAVR did not reduce procedural time, hospital length of stay, or intensive care unit length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike civilian hospitals, MA with CS/TTE did not reduce overall length of stay in the veteran population; however, it was safe and effective for transfemoral TAVR without impacting clinical outcomes of mortality, major vascular complications, and paravalvular leakage.

General anaesthesia or sedation for percutaneous aortic valve implantation? The questionnaire results and authors' experience

Introduction

Over the last two decades transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been approved for clinical use. The anaesthetic choice for this procedure is evolving. General anaesthesia was the predominant anaesthetic technique. Growing experience and advances in technology and economic considerations have led to an increasing interest in performing TAVR under monitored sedation.

Aim

The assessment of monitored sedation, called cooperative sedation, involves pharmacologically mediated suppression of consciousness and preservation of verbal contact in response to stimulation as a safe method of anaesthesia for TAVR.

Material and methods

Sixty out of 63 TAVR patients with femoral access received monitored sedation. Dexmedetomidine was administered in most of such cases (46 patients). A questionnaire was also carried out by staff involved in performing TAVR procedures, with more than 5 years of experience in it, concerning the method of anaesthesia and perioperative care.

Results

Conversion to general anaesthesia was required in 10% of patients (6 cases), only one as a patient-related complication (hypercarbia). The questionnaire carried out showed that anaesthesia and postoperative care after TAVR are underestimated.

Conclusions

The preliminary results regarding anaesthetic management in TAVR procedures demonstrate that monitored sedation is safe, provided that contraindications are observed.

Elective Percutaneous Paravalvular Leak Closure Under Conscious Sedation: Procedural Techniques and Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Paravalvular leaks (PVLs) are a well-recognized complication of prosthetic valves that are detected up to 18% of all implanted surgical valves. Perioperative morbidity is thought to be lower in percutaneous compared to surgical PVL repair. However, a direct comparison of PVL closure techniques has never been performed. Our study is the first to demonstrate that elective PVL closure with monitored anesthesia care can be achieved with high success and low complications rates resulting in short hospital stays.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort of patients admitted electively for catheter-based treatment of symptomatic prosthetic paravalvular regurgitation from Jan 2013 to April 2018. Both mitral and aortic PVLs were included. Patients' demographics, risk factors, procedural outcomes, In-hospital and thirty-day mortality were all reported. We followed the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) criteria to define device and procedural technical success. In-hospital and 30- day outcomes were assessed by retrospective chart review.

RESULTS

A total of 54 PVLs in thirty-seven patients were repaired (65% aortic & 35% mitral). The mean-age in the mitral cohort was lower than the aortic cohort (61 vs 72years, P<0.0001) but the two groups shared similar clinical risk factors (P>0.05). Average hospital stay was 1-2days (<1.5days overall cohort) which was significantly lower in the aortic compared to the mitral cohort (P=0.009). All procedures were guided by TEE under conscious sedation with monitored anesthesia care. Procedural technical success defined as any significant residual shunt was 81% in the overall cohort and 88% in the aortic group. No procedural deaths were reported. Short-term mortality during the first 30days was 5.4% (two patients).

CONCLUSION

Elective catheter-based repair of symptomatic prosthetic paravalvular regurgitation appears to be safe and effective. The use of conscious sedation with monitored anesthesia care resulted in short hospital stay.

Current Anesthetic Care of Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Europe: Results of an Online Survey

OBJECTIVES

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become an alternative treatment for patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis not eligible for surgical valve replacement due to a high periprocedural risk or comorbidities. However, there are several areas of debate concerning the pre-, intra- and post-procedural management. The standards and management for these topics may vary widely among different institutions and countries in Europe.

DESIGN

Structured web-based, anonymized, voluntary survey.

SETTING

Distribution of the survey via email among members of the European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology working in European centers performing TAVR between September and December 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

Physicians.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The survey consisted of 25 questions, including inquiries regarding number of TAVR procedures, technical aspects of TAVR, medical specialities present, preoperative evaluation of TAVR candidates, anesthesia regimen, as well as postoperative management. Seventy members participated in the survey. Reporting members mostly performed 151-to-300 TAVR procedures per year. In 90% of the responses, a cardiologist, cardiac surgeon, cardiothoracic anesthesiologist, and perfusionist always were available. Sixty-six percent of the members had a national curriculum for cardiothoracic anesthesia. Among 60% of responders, the decision for TAVR was made preoperatively by an interdisciplinary heart team with a cardiothoracic anesthesiologist, yet in 5 countries an anesthesiologist was not part of the decision-making. General anesthesia was employed in 40% of the responses, monitored anesthesia care in 44%, local anesthesia in 23%, and in 49% all techniques were offered to the patients. In cases of general anesthesia, endotracheal intubation almost always was performed (91%). It was stated that norepinephrine was the vasopressor of choice (63% of centers). Transesophageal echocardiography guiding, whether performed by an anesthesiologist or cardiologist, was used only ≤30%. Postprocedurally, patients were transferred to an intensive care unit by 51.43% of the respondents with a reported nurse-to-patient ratio of 1:2 or 1:3, to a post-anesthesia care unit by 27.14%, to a postoperative recovery room by 11.43%, and to a peripheral ward by 10%.

CONCLUSION

The results indicated that requirements and quality indicators (eg, periprocedural anesthetic management, involvement of the anesthesiologist in the heart team, etc) for TAVR procedures as published within the European guideline are largely, yet still not fully implemented in daily routine. In addition, anesthetic TAVR management also is performed heterogeneously throughout Europe.

The Effect of Anesthesia Type on Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVES

To assess postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) either under general anesthesia (GA) or monitored anesthesia care (MAC) as the primary anesthetic.

DESIGN

A retrospective, propensity-matched, cohort study, with univariate logistic regression to assess postoperative outcomes.

SETTING

Hospitals participating in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP).

PARTICIPANTS

The study comprised 559 patients who underwent a TAVR procedure under GA or MAC.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

After propensity score matching, there were no significant differences between the two cohorts in age, sex, race, body mass index, functional status, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, and other comorbidities. There were no significant differences in 30-day mortality between the two cohorts, or in the number of complications at 30 days. However, hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the MAC cohort compared with the GA cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing TAVR under MAC may have similar 30-day mortality and complications, but shorter hospital length of stay, than patients undergoing TAVR under GA.

Outcomes of Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Performed With General Anesthesia Using a Supraglottic Airway Versus Monitored Anesthesia Care

OBJECTIVE

Compare general anesthesia with a supraglottic airway versus monitored anesthesia care for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) in patients with aortic stenosis. The authors hypothesized that the supraglottic airway group would have similar operating room and procedure times, postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and hospital stays, and similar rates of intraprocedural and postprocedural complications compared with the monitored anesthesia care group.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review with 1:1 propensity score matching of supraglottic airway to monitored anesthesia care patients.

SETTING

Tertiary care academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

TF-TAVR patients between 2017 and 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

Supraglottic airway or monitored anesthesia care.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

One hundred forty-eight supraglottic airway patients were matched with 148 monitored anesthesia care patients. Monitored anesthesia care patients had slightly shorter operating room (p < 0.001) and procedure times (p = 0.015). No difference was observed in hospital length of stay (p = 0.34). Fewer patients in the supraglottic airway group required a PACU stay >2 hours (p < 0.001). Use of intraprocedural vasopressors (p < 0.001) and fentanyl dosage (p < 0.001) was higher in the supraglottic airway group. No differences were observed in postoperative complications or procedural success rates.

CONCLUSIONS

In this, the first study to compare these 2 modalities, supraglottic airway use was demonstrated to be a safe, feasible alternative to monitored anesthesia care during TF-TAVR and did not increase organ-specific morbidity, 30-day mortality, hospital length of stay, or PACU length of stay. Even though supraglottic airway was associated with slight increases in procedure and operating room times, these were not clinically significant.

Dexmedetomidine Is an Equal Cost Alternative to Propofol in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement, With Equivalent In-Hospital and 30-Day Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with monitored anesthesia care (MAC) is well-tolerated and is growing in popularity. Differences in outcomes based on anesthetic agent choice with MAC has received less attention. The authors sought to determine whether differences in outcomes and cost exist based on whether patients receive dexmedetomidine or propofol when undergoing TAVR with MAC.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

The Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania.

PARTICIPANTS

The study comprised 161 patients who underwent TAVR with MAC between May 2014 and March 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A propofol-only (n = 58) group and dexmedetomidine-only (n = 103) group were identified. No differences in in-hospital mortality or complication rate were identified when evaluating for stroke, transfusion, new arrhythmia, cardiac arrest, or bleeding and vascular complications (p > 0.05, all). Thirty-day outcomes were also equivalent, with no differences in mortality, stroke, vascular complication, new arrhythmia, or myocardial infarction (p > 0.05, all). The average amount of epinephrine, norepinephrine, or phenylephrine used intraoperatively was not significantly different. Overall median hospitalization costs were equivalent ($57,554.31 with dexmedetomidine v $58,538.08 with propofol, p = 0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in in-hospital outcomes, 30-day outcomes, or total cost of the patient's hospitalization, based on the use of dexmedetomidine versus propofol in patients undergoing TAVR.

General Anesthesia or Conscious Sedation for Transfemoral Aortic Valve Replacement with the SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve

Differences in the benefits of conscious sedation (CS) and general anesthesia (GA) during transfemoral aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are unclear.We aimed to assess differences in procedural and clinical outcomes based on the type of anesthesia received during TAVI.We analyzed SOURCE 3 Registry data for patients who received the SAPIEN 3 valve by type of anesthesia used during TAVI.Of the 1694 TAVI patients, 1027 received CS and 667 received GA. Patients were similar at baseline (81.5 years; Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score 7.0). Compared with the GA group, the CS group had fewer intra-procedural transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and post implantation dilatations performed, and less contrast medium was used. The CS group had significantly less kidney injury at 7 days post-procedure than the GA group (0.4% versus 1.5%, P = 0.014). Moderate paravalvular leaks (PVL) occurred more frequently in the CS group versus the GA group (2.2% versus 0.8%; P = 0.041). No severe PVL were reported. Median total hospital length of stay (LOS) after TAVI was 10 days in the CS group and 11 days in the GS group. At 30 days, all-cause death was 2.1% in CS and 1.7% in GS (P = 0.47), and myocardial infarction was 0.2% in CS and 0.1% in GS (P = 0.83).Our analyses found no significant major outcome differences between CS and GA during TAVI.

Efficiency, Safety, and Quality of Life After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Performed With Moderate Sedation Versus General Anesthesia

There is growing interest in "minimalist" transcatheter aortic valve implantation (M-TAVI), performed with conscious sedation instead of general anesthesia (GA-TAVI). We assessed the impact of M-TAVI on procedural efficiency, long-term safety, and quality of life (QoL) in 477 patients with severe aortic stenosis (82 years, women 50%, STS 5.0), who underwent M-TAVI (n = 278) or GA-TAVI (n = 199). M-TAVI patients were less likely to have NYHA Class ≥3, valve-in-valve TAVI, and receive self-expanding valves. M-TAVI was completed without conversion to GA in 269 (97%) patients. M-TAVI was more efficient that GA-TAVI including shorter lengths of stay (2 vs 3 days, p <0.0001), higher likelihood of being discharged home (87% vs 72%, p <0.0001), less use of blood transfusions (10% vs 22%, p = 0.0008), inotropes (13% vs 32%, p <0.0001), contrast volume (50 vs 90 ml, p <0.0001), fluoroscopy time (20 vs 24 minute, p <0.0001), and need for >1 valves (0.4 vs 5.5%, p = 0.0004). At 1-month, death/stroke (M-TAVI vs GA-TAVI 4.0 vs 6.5%) and a "safety composite" end point (death, stroke, transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, new dialysis, major vascular complication, major or life-threatening bleeding, and new pacemaker: 17.6% vs 21.1%) were similar (p = NS for both). At a median follow-up of 365 days, survival curves showed similar incidence of death/stroke as well as the safety composite end point between the groups. QoL scores were similar at baseline and 1-month after TAVI. In multivariable analyses, M-TAVI showed significant improvements in all parameters of procedural efficiency. In conclusion, M-TAVI is more efficient than GA-TAVI, with similar safety at 1-month and long-term, and similar QoL scores at 1 month.

Recent Developments in Catheter-Based Cardiac Procedures

New developments in transcatheter valve technologies including aortic valve replacement and mitral valve and tricuspid valve interventions are described. Recent studies evaluating the success rate, patient outcomes, and anesthesiologic management of the procedures are discussed.

Sedation versus general anesthesia for transcatheter aortic valve replacement

There is currently significant controversy regarding the best anesthesia management for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Some institutions primarily use general anesthesia (GA) but many institutions primarily use moderate sedation. Much of the controversy is due to the limited evidence base available to inform this decision and the strong feelings and pre-conceived notions about the optimal anesthesia technique which exist amongst anesthesiologists, cardiologists, and cardiac surgeons. In this article and in the context of TAVR, we will define the salient differences between GA and sedation, review the results and limitations of the currently available data, and discuss the priority questions for future research.

Recent developments and controversies in transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Interventional cardiology has been revolutionised by transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), which has become established as the benchmark treatment for severe aortic stenosis in patients at high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). Increased procedural familiarity and progression in device technology has enabled improvements to be made in complication rates, which have led to a commensurate expansion in the use of TAVI; it is now a viable alternative to AVR in patients at intermediate surgical risk, and has been used in cohorts such as those with bicuspid aortic valves or pure, severe aortic regurgitation. Given the rapid expansion in the use of TAVI, including cohorts of younger patients with fewer co-morbidities, attention must be paid to further reducing remaining complications, such as cardiac tamponade or stroke. To this end, novel techniques and devices have been devised and trialled, with varying levels of success. Furthermore, significant work has gone into refining the technique with exploration of alternative imaging modalities, as well as alternative access routes to provide greater options for patients with challenging vascular anatomy. Whilst significant progress has been made with TAVI, areas of uncertainty remain such as the management of concomitant coronary artery disease and the optimum post-procedure antiplatelet regimen. As such, research in this field continues apace, and is likely to continue as use of TAVI becomes more widespread. This review provides a summary of the existing evidence, as well as an overview of recent developments and contentious issues in the field of TAVI.

Feasibility, Accuracy, and Reproducibility of Aortic Annular and Root Sizing for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using Novel Automated Three-Dimensional Echocardiographic Software: Comparison with Multi-Detector Row Computed Tomography

BACKGROUND

In transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), multi-detector row computed tomography (MDCT) is currently the standard imaging modality for correct prosthesis sizing, despite risks of radiation and contrast-induced renal injury. Three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) has been proposed as a potential alternative imaging technique, and recently, automated 3D transesophageal echocardiographic software (Aortic Valve Navigator [AVN], an unreleased prototype from Philips) has been developed for assessment of the aortic annulus and root. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility, accuracy, and reproducibility of AVN measurements in TAVR candidates by performing a comparison with MDCT.

METHODS

In 150 patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis referred for TAVR, data on aortic annular and root dimensions prospectively acquired using 3D TEE and MDCT were retrospectively analyzed. Image quality on 3D TEE and the duration of analysis with AVN were recorded, as well as the aortic valve Agatston score on MDCT.

RESULTS

Data were obtained using 3D TEE and MDCT in 100% of patients for aortic annular dimensions and in 89% for aortic root dimensions. The mean duration of analysis using AVN was 4.2 ± 1.0 min, but it was significantly shorter with better 3D echocardiographic image quality and lower Agatston score on MDCT. Correlation of measurements between 3D TEE and MDCT was good to excellent for all anatomic locations (sinotubular junction mean diameter, R = 0.71; sinus of Valsalva mean diameter, R = 0.87; aortic annular mean diameter, R = 0.75; aortic annular perimeter, R = 0.83; aortic annular area, R = 0.91), with low inter- and intraobserver variability (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥ 0.93 and r ≥ 0.90 for all locations). Comparison based on conventional prosthesis sizing charts yielded excellent agreement in prosthesis size choice (κ = 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

New automated 3D transesophageal echocardiographic software allows accurate modeling and reproducible quantification of aortic annular and root dimensions with high feasibility. An excellent correlation between measurements with AVN and MDCT and agreement in prosthesis sizing suggests the use of AVN in clinical practice as potential alternative to MDCT before TAVR.

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.

Is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the potential favourable effects of local anaesthesia plus sedation (LAS) compared with general anaesthesia (GA) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and the reference lists of eligible publications were screened for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies published between 1 January 2006 and 26 June 2016 that compare LAS to GA in an adult study population undergoing TAVI. We conducted study quality assessments using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and structured the review according to PRISMA. A meta-analysis calculating the pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) under the assumption of a random-effects model was performed. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated using the I² statistic and Cochran's Q-test.

RESULTS

After database screening, one RCT and 19 observational studies were included in the review. We found no differences between LAS and GA in terms of 30-day mortality, in-hospital mortality and other endpoints that addressed safety and complication rates. LAS was associated with a shorter ICU and hospital stay and with lower rates of catecholamine administration and red blood cell transfusion. New pacemaker implantations occurred more frequently under LAS. The overall conversion rate from LAS to GA was 6.2%.

CONCLUSION

For TAVI, both LAS and GA are feasible and safe. LAS may have some benefits such as increased haemodynamic stability and shorter hospital and ICU stays, but it does not impact 30-day mortality. Since there is a paucity of randomised trial data and the findings are mainly based on observational study data, this review should be considered as a hypothesis-generating article for subsequent RCTs that are required to confirm the potential favourable effects we detected for LAS.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016048398 (PROSPERO).

A Pilot Analysis of the Association Between Types of Monitored Anesthesia Care Drugs and Outcomes in Transfemoral Aortic Valve Replacement Performed Without General Anesthesia

OBJECTIVE

The types of agents used for monitored anesthesia care (MAC) and their possible differential effects on outcomes have received less study despite increased use over general anesthesia (GA) in transfemoral aortic valve replacements (TAVRs). In this pilot analysis of patients undergoing TAVR using MAC, the authors described the anesthetic agents used and sought to investigate the possible association of anesthetic agent choice with outcomes and the extent to which total weight and time-adjusted doses of anesthetics declined with increasing 10-year age increments.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-three participants scheduled to undergo TAVR, with a primary plan of conscious sedation between November 2014 and June 2016, were included.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Types of MAC were divided into 4 primary groups, but 2 groups were focused: propofol (n = 39) and dexmedetomidine plus propofol (n = 34). Conversion to GA occurred in 6 participants (6.45%) and was not associated with the type of sedation received. The authors also compared patients who received dexmedetomidine with those who did not in accordance with their a priori analytic plan. There were no associations between the use of dexmedetomidine and postoperative delirium or intensive care unit/hospital length of stay. No significant trends in medication dose adjustments were seen across increasing 10-year age increments.

CONCLUSIONS

A wide breadth of MAC medications is in use among TAVR patients and does not support differences in outcomes. Despite recommendations to reduce anesthetic drug dosing in the elderly, no significant trends in dose reduction with increasing age were noted.

Avoidance of urinary catheterization to minimize in-hospital complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: An observational study

Background:

Contemporary transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices and approach present opportunities to review historical practices initially informed by early treatment development and cardiac surgery. The avoidance of urinary catheterization in the older TAVI population is a strategy to minimize in-hospital complications. The purpose of the study was to explore elimination-related complications following the phased implementation of a default strategy of avoiding urinary catheterization in patients undergoing transfemoral (TF) TAVI.

Methods:

We conducted an observational study using a retrospective chart review of patients treated between 2011 and 2013 to identify patient characteristics, peri-procedure details, in-hospital outcomes and elimination-related complications in patients who did or did not receive a peri-procedure indwelling catheter. Descriptive analyses were used to report differences between the groups; we conducted a regression analysis to explore the relationship between the practice of urinary catheterization and total procedure time.

Results:

Of the 408 patients who underwent TF TAVR, 188 (46.1%) received a peri-procedure indwelling urinary catheter and 220 (53.9%) did not. There was no difference in in-hospital mortality (2.2%), disabling stroke (0.5%), or other major cardiac adverse events. The avoidance of a urinary catheter resulted in significantly lower rates of urinary tract infection requiring a new antibiotic regimen (1.4% versus 6.1%, p = 0.014), haematuria documented by medicine or nursing (3.7% versus 17.6%, p = 0.001), and the need for continuous bladder irrigation (2.7% versus 0%, p = 0.027).

Conclusion:

The avoidance of a urinary catheter may contribute to improved outcomes in patients undergoing TAVI. The intervention should be further evaluated within the broader study of minimalist TAVI.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: The year in review 2016

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) continued to make major strides in 2016, simultaneously expanding its application to lower risk patients as well as more technically challenging subsets of patients with aortic stenosis (AS). The two major accomplishments this year were the establishment of TAVR as the preferred treatment strategy over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in intermediate risk patients, and initial signals that TAVR and SAVR may be clinically equivalent in low-risk populations. Meanwhile, there is continued expansion of TAVR to challenging clinical subsets (bicuspid aortic valve [BAV], patients with concomitant advanced coronary artery disease [CAD], and failed surgical bioprostheses), and encouraging initial experiences with newer transcatheter heart valve systems. This paper summarizes the major research studies published on TAVR in 2016.