1
|
Ma X, Chu H, Han K, Shao Q, Yu Y, Jia S, Wang D, Wang Z, Zhou Y. Postoperative delirium after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Geriatr Soc 2023; 71:646-660. [PMID: 36419366 DOI: 10.1111/jgs.18104] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2022] [Revised: 08/19/2022] [Accepted: 09/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
AIMS To perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative delirium (POD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS We conducted a systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from the time of the first human TAVR procedure in 2002 until December 24, 2021, which was supplemented by manual searches of bibliographies. Data were collected on incidence rates, risk factors, and/or associated mortality of POD after TAVR. Pooled analyses were conducted using random effects models to yield mean differences, odds ratios, hazard ratios, and risk ratios, with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS A total of 70 articles (69 studies) comprising 413,389 patients were included. The study heterogeneity was substantial. The pooled mean incidence of POD after TAVR in all included studies was 9.8% (95% CI: 8.7%-11.0%), whereas that in studies using validated tools to assess for delirium at least once a day for at least 2 consecutive days after TAVR was 20.7% (95% CI: 17.8%-23.7%). According to the level of evidence and results of meta-analysis, independent preoperative risk factors with a high level of evidence included increased age, male sex, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack, atrial fibrillation/flutter, weight loss, electrolyte abnormality, and impaired Instrumental Activities of Daily Living; intraoperative risk factors included non-transfemoral access and general anesthesia; and acute kidney injury was a postoperative risk factor. POD after TAVR was associated with significantly increased mortality (pooled unadjusted RR: 2.20, 95% CI: 1.79-2.71; pooled adjusted RR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.25-2.10), particularly long-term mortality (pooled unadjusted HR: 2.84, 95% CI: 1.91-4.23; pooled adjusted HR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.30-2.73). CONCLUSIONS POD after TAVR is common and is associated with an increased risk of mortality. Accurate identification of risk factors for POD after TAVR and implementation of preventive measures are critical to improve prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaoteng Ma
- Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Huijun Chu
- Department of Anesthesia, Qingdao Women and Children's Hospital, Qingdao University, Qingdao, China
| | - Kangning Han
- Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Qiaoyu Shao
- Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Yi Yu
- Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Shuo Jia
- Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Dunliang Wang
- Department of Anesthesia, Qingdao Women and Children's Hospital, Qingdao University, Qingdao, China
| | - Zhijian Wang
- Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Yujie Zhou
- Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
New challenges in cardiac intensive care units. Clin Res Cardiol 2021; 110:1369-1379. [PMID: 33966127 DOI: 10.1007/s00392-021-01869-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2021] [Accepted: 05/04/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
Critical care cardiology is a steadily and rapidly developing sub-specialization within cardiovascular medicine, since the first emergence of a coronary care unit in the early 1960s. Today, modern cardiac intensive care units (CICU) serve a complex patient population with a high burden of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular critical illnesses. Treatment of these patients requires a multidisciplinary approach, with a combination of highly specialized knowledge and skills in cardiovascular diseases, as well as emergency, critical-care and internal medicine. The CICU has always posed special challenges to both experienced intensivists as well as fellows-in-training (FIT) and is certainly one of the most demanding training phases. In recent years, these challenges have grown significantly owing to technological innovations, with new and steadily rising numbers of complex interventional procedures and new options for temporary circulatory support for critically ill patients, such as venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Herein, we focus on the successful CICU management of these special patient cohorts, which must become an integral part of critical-care training.
Collapse
|
3
|
Stremmel C, Scherer C, Lüsebrink E, Kupka D, Schmid T, Stocker T, Kellnar A, Kleeberger J, Sinner MF, Petzold T, Mehilli J, Braun D, Orban M, Hausleiter J, Massberg S, Orban M. Treatment of acute cardiac tamponade: A retrospective analysis of classical intermittent versus continuous pericardial drainage. IJC HEART & VASCULATURE 2021; 32:100722. [PMID: 33644296 PMCID: PMC7887384 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2021.100722] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2020] [Revised: 01/08/2021] [Accepted: 01/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
Acute cardiac tamponade is a highly relevant complication in modern cardiology. Continuous pericardial drainage is safe and does not increase total drainage volume. Continuous drainage associates with lower rates of open-heart surgical interventions. Continuous drainage associates with reduced re-tamponades and mortality on day 5.
Background Acute cardiac tamponade is a life-threatening pathology in modern cardiology as catheter-based interventions become increasingly relevant. Pericardiocentesis is usually the primary treatment of choice. However, protocols for handling of draining pigtail catheters are very variable due to limit data and require further investigation. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 52 patients with acute cardiac tamponade requiring immediate pericardiocentesis from January 2017 to August 2020. Patients were treated with a classical approach of intermittent manual aspiration or continuous pericardial drainage using a redon drainage system. Results Mean age of patients was 74 years in both groups. Most common causes for cardiac tamponade were percutaneous coronary interventions in about 50% and transaortic valve implantations in 25% of all cases. 28 patients were treated with classic intermittent drainage from 2017 to 2020. 24 patients were treated with continuous drainage from December 2018–2020. Compared to classical intermittent drainage treatment, continuous drainage was associated with a lower rate of a surgical intervention or cardiac re-tamponade and a lower mortality at 5 days (HR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1–0.9, log-rank p = 0.03). Despite a longer total drainage time under continuous suction, drainage volumes were comparable in both groups. Conclusion Acute cardiac tamponade can be efficiently treated by pericardiocentesis with subsequent continuous negative pressure drainage via a pigtail catheter. Our retrospective analysis shows a significantly lower mortality, a decreased rate of interventions and lower rates of cardiac re-tamponade without any relevant side effects when compared to classical intermittent manual drainage. These findings require further investigations in larger, randomized trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Stremmel
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Clemens Scherer
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Enzo Lüsebrink
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Danny Kupka
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Teresa Schmid
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Thomas Stocker
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Antonia Kellnar
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Jan Kleeberger
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Moritz F. Sinner
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Tobias Petzold
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Julinda Mehilli
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- Medizinische Klinik I, Krankenhaus Landshut-Achdorf, Landshut, Germany
| | - Daniel Braun
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Mathias Orban
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Jörg Hausleiter
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Steffen Massberg
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
| | - Martin Orban
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany
- Corresponding author at: Intensive Care Unit, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Marchioninistraße 15, 81377 Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Abstract
Structural heart disease (SHD) emergencies include acute deterioration of a stable lesion or development of a new critical lesion. Structural heart disease emergencies can produce heart failure and cardiogenic shock despite preserved systolic function that may not respond to standard medical therapy and typically necessitate surgical or percutaneous intervention. Comprehensive Doppler echocardiography is the initial diagnostic modality of choice to determine the cause and severity of the underlying SHD lesion. Patients with chronic SHD lesions which deteriorate due to intercurrent illness (eg, infection or arrhythmia) may not require urgent intervention, whereas patients with an acute SHD lesion often require definitive therapy. Medical stabilization prior to definitive intervention differs substantially between stenotic lesions (aortic stenosis, mitral stenosis, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction) and regurgitant lesions (aortic regurgitation, mitral regurgitation, ventricular septal defect). Patients with regurgitant lesions typically require aggressive afterload reduction and inotropic support, whereas patients with stenotic lesions may paradoxically require β-blockade and vasoconstrictors. Emergent cardiac surgery for patients with decompensated heart failure or cardiogenic shock carries a substantial mortality risk but may be necessary for patients who are not eligible for catheter-based percutaneous SHD intervention. This review explores initial medical stabilization and subsequent definitive therapy for patients with SHD emergencies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacob C Jentzer
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, 4352Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN, USA.,Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, 4352Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Bradley Ternus
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, 5228University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Mackram Eleid
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, 4352Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Charanjit Rihal
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, 4352Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|