Effect of local anesthetic management with conscious sedation in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

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.

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.

Sedation with Ketamine-Propofol in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Comparative Retrospective Study on General Anesthesia

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is used for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high risk for surgery. Since these patients are elderly and have comorbidities, their management is of great importance.

OBJECTIVES

This retrospective study compares two anesthesia techniques during TAVI: sedation (ketamine and propofol) and general anesthesia.

METHODS

Patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI during 2021 in our hospital were retrospectively screened. Demographic data, comorbidities, anesthesia management, complications, and mortality of the patients were obtained from the records.

RESULTS

There were 137 patients treated with TAVI; 74 (54%) patients had sedation and 63 (46%) had general anesthesia. When the anesthesia management was evaluated, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the patients who received general anesthesia and sedation. After univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate factors having an impact on mortality, anemia (only in univariate analysis) in the whole study population was a statistically significant risk factor for mortality in patients undergoing TAVI (p<0.014).

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in mortality in terms of anesthesia management. Anemia was a risk factor for mortality (only in univariate analysis) in the whole study population. We concluded that conscious sedation with ketamine and propofol is effective and safe for TAVI procedures compared to general anesthesia.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Changes in the Elderly: Impact on Anesthetics

Anesthesiologists are increasingly required to care for frail elderly patients. A detailed knowledge of the influence of age on the pharmacokinetics and dynamics of the anesthetic drugs is essential for optimal safety and care. For most of the anesthetic drugs, the elderly need lower doses to achieve the same plasma concentrations, and at any given plasma and effect-site concentration, they will have more profound clinical effects than younger patients. Caution is required, with close monitoring of clinical effects and active titration of dose administration to achieve the desired level of effect, ideally following the "start low, go slow" principle.

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.

Local Anesthesia versus Conscious Sedation among Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation-A Propensity Score Analysis

BACKGROUND

Conscious sedation (CS) has been used successfully to treat patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and as such is considered the standard anesthesia method. The local anesthesia (LA) only approach may be feasible and safe thanks to improvements in operators' experience.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate differences between LA only versus CS approaches on short- and long-term outcomes among patients undergoing TAVI.

METHODS

We performed a propensity score analysis on 1096 patients undergoing TAVI for severe AS. Two hundred and seventy-four patients in the LA group were matched in a ratio of 1:3 with 822 patients in the CS group. The primary outcome was a 1-year mortality rate. Secondary outcomes included procedural and peri-procedural complication rates and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Patients in the CS group had significantly higher rates of grade 2-3 acute kidney injury and were more likely to have had new left bundle branch block and high-degree atrioventricular block. Patients who underwent TAVI under CS had significantly higher in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates compared to LA (1.6% vs. 0.0% p-value = 0.036 and 8.5% vs. 3.3% p-value = 0.004, respectively). Kaplan-Meier's survival analysis showed that the cumulative probability of 1-year mortality was significantly higher among subjects undergoing CS compared to patients LA (p-value log-rank = 0.024). Regression analysis indicated that patients undergoing CS were twice more likely to die of at 1-year when compared to patients under LA (HR 2.18, 95%CI 1.09-4.36, p-value = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

As compared to CS, the LA-only approach is associated with lower rates of peri-procedural complications and 1-year mortality rates.

Comparison of anesthesia management in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to investigate the effects of two different anesthetic techniques in our patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS

In this study, 303 patients who underwent TAVI procedure with a diagnosis of severe aortic stenosis between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2018 were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were divided according to the type of anesthesia given during each procedure as; general anesthesia (GA), local anesthesia (LA).

RESULTS

LA was preferred in 245 (80.8%) of 303 patients who underwent TAVI, while GA was preferred in 58 patients (19.1%). Median ages ​​of our patients who received LA and GA were 83 and 84, respectively. The procedure and anesthesia durations of the patients in the GA group were longer than the LA group (p< 0.00001, p < 0.00001, respectively). Demographic and pre-operative clinical data were similar in comparison between two groups (p > 0.05) except for peripheral artery disease. Hypertension was the most common comorbidity in both groups. While the number of inotrope use was significantly higher in patients who received GA (p < 0.00001), no significant differences were found between LA and GA patients in terms of major complications and mortality (p > 0.05). Intensive care and hospital stays were significantly shorter in the LA group (p = 0.001, p = 0.023, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The anesthetic technique of TAVI procedure did not have a significant effect on outcomes including; complications, mortality and success of the procedure. LA provides shorter duration of procedure and hospital stay.

Impact of Anesthesia Strategy and Valve Type on Clinical Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

The randomized SOLVE-TAVI (compariSon of secOnd-generation seLf-expandable vs. balloon-expandable Valves and gEneral vs. local anesthesia in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial compared newer-generation self-expanding valves (SEV) and balloon-expandable valves (BEV) as well as local anesthesia with conscious sedation (CS) and general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Both strategies showed similar outcomes at 30 days.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes during 1-year follow-up in the randomized SOLVE-TAVI trial.

METHODS

Using a 2 × 2 factorial design 447 intermediate- to high-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis were randomly assigned to transfemoral TAVR using either the SEV (Evolut R, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota) or the BEV (Sapien 3, Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) as well as CS or GA at 7 sites.

RESULTS

In the valve-comparison strategy, rates of the combined endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, moderate or severe paravalvular leakage, and permanent pacemaker implantation were similar between the BEV and SEV group (n = 84, 38.3% vs. n = 87, 40.4%; hazard ratio: 0.94; 95% confidence interval: 0.70 to 1.26; p = 0.66) at 1 year. Regarding the anesthesia comparison, the combined endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, and acute kidney injury occurred with similar rates in the GA and CS groups (n = 61, 25.7% vs. n = 54, 23.8%; hazard ratio: 1.09; 95% confidence interval: 0.76 to 1.57; p = 0.63).

CONCLUSIONS

In intermediate- to high-risk patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR, newer-generation SEV and BEV as well as CS and GA showed similar clinical outcomes at 1 year using a combined clinical endpoint. (SecOnd-generation seLf-expandable Versus Balloon-expandable Valves and gEneral Versus Local Anesthesia in TAVI [SOLVE-TAVI]; NCT02737150).

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.

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.

'Minimalist approach' for transcatheter mitral valve replacement using intracardiac echocardiography and conscious sedation: a case series

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation operators have adapted to a less invasive technique by foregoing the use of general anaesthesia and transoesophageal echocardiography. This is known as a ‘minimalist approach’. This approach has yet to be explored in transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR). Two patients with high perioperative risk underwent TMVR using only monitored conscious sedation (CS) and intracardiac echocardiography (ICE).

Case summary

The patients were symptomatic and required treatment of severe mitral regurgitation and severe mitral stenosis in a mitral valve ring and prosthetic mitral valve, respectively. With the use of an antegrade transseptal approach, the procedure was conducted under CS using ICE only. After placement of the prosthetic mitral valve, the valve was assessed by advancing the ICE catheter through the interatrial septal defect and no significant paravalvular leak occurred. In one case, ad hoc treatment of right to left shunting was successfully pursued. Valve function was excellent immediately and at 24 h after implantation and resulted in significant haemodynamic improvement.

Conclusion

With more TMVR cases being conducted, the ‘minimalist approach’ with CS and ICE may be considered in selected cases.

Comparison of Monitored Anesthesia Care and General Anesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Objective

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is a safe, minimally invasive treatment for severe aortic stenosis in patients with moderate-to-high surgical risk. Monitored anesthesia is administered by an anesthesiologist. This study compares transcatheter aortic valve outcomes under monitored anesthesia vs general anesthesia.

Methods

Data were prospectively collected for 286 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement at a single academic hospital from March 2012 to August 2016. The patients were grouped by type of anesthesia: monitored vs general. A propensity score match was performed to compare intraoperative and post-operative outcomes between groups.

Results

General anesthesia was used in 102 patients and moderate sedation in 184. Propensity score matching produced 80 pairs. Compared to procedures under general anesthesia, patients receiving monitored anesthesia had shorter procedure (1.6 [1.4, 2.0] vs 2.0 [1.6, 2.5] hours; P < 0.001) and fluoroscopy times (17 [14.5, 22.5] vs 25 [17.9, 30.3] minutes; P < 0.001) and shorter hospital length-of-stay (3 [2.0, 4.0] vs 5 [3.0, 7.0] days; P < 0.001) but no difference in intensive care unit length-of-stay. Blood transfusion was more common in patients undergoing general anesthesia, but there was no difference in stroke, renal failure, postoperative atrial fibrillation, or need for permanent pacemaker. More patients were discharged to home after monitored anesthesia (90% vs 64%; P < 0.001). There was no difference in 30-day mortality (0% vs 3%; P = 0.15).

Conclusions

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement under monitored anesthesia provides the safety of anesthesia-led sedation without intubation and general anesthetic. We found no compromise in patient safety or clinical outcomes.

Performing optimal transcatheter aortic valve implantation: The need for tailored use of transcatheter valves

BACKGROUND

Despite the worldwide development of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) over the last decade, strategies that take patient characteristics into account to guide the choice of transcatheter heart valve have not been evaluated.

AIM

To evaluate the immediate results of TAVI using a tailored choice of balloon-expandable or self-expanding transcatheter heart valve, according to each patient's clinical and anatomical characteristics.

METHODS

This single-centre observational study included all patients treated with TAVI from 2012 to 2017. The 30-day results were reported according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria. A total of 502 patients were included (mean age, 81±9 years; 52% men; mean EuroSCORE II, 7.0±6.5%). Three main variables guided the choice of transcatheter heart valve: the anatomy of the iliofemoral arteries and of the aortic root, and the general condition of the patient.

RESULTS

A SAPIEN™ balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve was used in 275 patients (55%) and a CoreValve™ self-expanding transcatheter heart valve in 227 patients (45%). The approach was transfemoral in 427 patients (85%), and only 29 patients (6%) required transthoracic access. At 30-day follow-up, the rates of adverse events were as follows: mortality, 3.2%; stroke, 3.0%; major bleeding, 5.9%; and major vascular complications, 6.0%. Rates of complications at 30 days were similar in the SAPIEN™ and CoreValve™ groups, except for a higher rate of pacemaker implantation in the latter group (29.5% vs. 14.5%; P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The choice of balloon-expandable or self-expanding transcatheter heart valve tailored to the patient's clinical and anatomical characteristics allows for maximal use of the transfemoral approach, and is associated with low 30-day rates of major complications and mortality.

The Importance of Conscious Sedation for Life-Saving Valve Procedures in Patients With Rheumatic Heart Disease From Low- to Middle-Income Countries

BACKGROUND

Severe valve disease, which requires intervention, remains strongly associated with mortality in patients with rheumatic heart disease. Percutaneous mitral commissurotomy (PMC) is the procedure of choice for the treatment of patients with isolated or predominantly rheumatic mitral stenosis. This procedure has been performed under sedation to avoid the potential effects of general anesthesia on intracardiac pressure measurements. However, there are limited data on sedation during PMC, especially using easily available medications in low- and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and hemodynamic effects of conscious sedation during PMC in patients with significant mitral stenosis.

METHODS

This study prospectively enrolled 23 patients who underwent PMC with the Inoue balloon technique for hemodynamically significant mitral stenosis. For conscious sedation, midazolam 25 μg/kg and fentanyl 1 μg/kg were administered, and 5 min after the infusion, the level of sedation was evaluated by Ramsay sedation scale. A range of invasive hemodynamic measurements, including cardiac output and pulmonary artery pressures, were recorded before and immediately after sedation.

RESULTS

The mean age was 44.9 ± 10.8 years, and 19 patients (83%) were women. After sedation, the majority of patients were in categories 2 and 3 of the Ramsay sedation scale (cooperative, orientated, tranquil, and responding to commands). Oxygen saturation dropped from an average of 98.5% to 96.0% without supplementary oxygen. Left ventricular systolic pressure and central aortic pressures decreased after sedation. However, none of the other parameters changed significantly after sedation, including pulmonary artery pressures, pulmonary vascular resistance, and cardiac index.

CONCLUSIONS

This simple model of conscious sedation was able to promote anxiolysis, analgesia, and comfort for the procedure without serious hemodynamic effects, which can be a reasonable choice in developing countries.

Clinical experience with trans-catheter aortic valve implantation at a tertiary hospital in the Republic of Ireland

INTRODUCTION

There is a paucity of published data on the clinical experience with trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in the Republic of Ireland. We sought to examine the clinical outcomes of patients with medium-term follow-up treated with TAVI at our institution.

METHODS

A prospective TAVI registry was used to assess the baseline demographics, procedural variables and clinical outcomes of patients treated with TAVI between the inception of the programme in 2008 and November 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 354 patients (mean age 80.9 ± 8.1 years, 58% male, mean STS score 6.1 ± 4.3%) were treated during the study period. Major in-hospital outcomes included in-lab death (n = 2, 0.6%), stroke (n = 8, 2.2%), device embolisation (n = 4, 1.2%), permanent pacemaker implantation (n = 22, 6.2%) and major vascular complication (n = 2, 0.6%). The median length of hospital stay was 4 days (IQR 2-8 days). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of freedom from death at 30 days and 1 year for the entire cohort was 97 ± 1% and 85.4 ± 2.3%, respectively. Trans-femoral access was associated with a significantly lower rate of death and/or stroke at 1 year compared to trans-apical access (84.9 ± 2.4% versus 60 ± 8.9%, p = 0.0005). There was no significant difference in freedom from death and/or stroke at 1 year between balloon-expandable and self-expanding valves (81.6 ± 2.6% versus 84.4 ± 7.4%, p = 0.63).

CONCLUSION

This study documents low complication rates and favourable rates of survival following TAVI in a consecutive series of patients undergoing TAVI at a tertiary referral centre in the Republic of Ireland. These data support the application of this therapy in the Irish context.

Intra-procedural monitoring protocol using routine transthoracic echocardiography with backup trans-oesophageal probe in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a single centre experience

Aim

The aim of this study is to describe our 9-year experience in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) as a routine intra-procedural imaging modality with trans-oesophageal echocardiography (TEE) as a backup.

Methods and results

From January 2008 to December 2017, 1218 patients underwent transfemoral TAVR at our Institution. Except the first 20 cases, all procedures have been performed under conscious sedation, with fluoroscopic guidance and TTE imaging monitoring. Once the TTE resulted suboptimal for final result assessment or a complication was either suspected or identified on TTE, TEE evaluation was promptly performed under general anaesthesia. Only 24 (1.9%) cases required a switch to TEE: 6 cases for suboptimal TTE prosthetic valve leak (PVL) quantification; 12 cases for haemodynamic instability; 2 cases for pericardial effusion without haemodynamic instability; 4 cases for urgent TAVR. The 30-days and 1-year all-cause mortality were 2.1% and 10.2%, respectively. Cardiac mortality at 30-days and 1-year follow-up were 0.6% and 4.1%, respectively. Intra-procedural and pre-discharge TT evaluation showed good agreement for PVL quantification (k agreement: 0.827, P = 0.005).

Conclusion

TTE monitoring seems a reasonable imaging tool for TAVR intra-procedural monitoring without delay in diagnosis of complications and a reliable paravalvular leak assessment. However, TEE is undoubtedly essential in identifying the exact mechanism in most of the complications.

Comparison of Local Versus General Anesthesia Following Transfemoral Transcatheter Self-Expanding Aortic Valve Implantation (from the Transcatheter Valve Therapeutics Registry)

Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) is mostly performed under general anesthesia (GA) in most US centers. We examined in-hospital and 30-day outcomes in patients who underwent TF-TAVR with a self-expanding bioprosthesis using local anesthesia (LA) or GA. Patients from the Transcatheter Valve Therapeutics Registry who underwent TF-TAVR from January 2014 to June 2016 with LA or GA were evaluated. Propensity matching was performed and procedural and clinical outcomes compared up to 30 days. A total of 11,006 patients were included (GA: 8,239 [74.9%] and LA: 2,767 [25.1%]). After propensity matching (n = 1,988 matched sets), device success was similar (94.5% vs 94.6%, p = 0.905). No differences in in-hospital stroke (2.7% vs 2.3%, p = 0.413) or paravalvular regurgitation grade (p = 0.113) were noted. Fewer LA patients were converted to open heart surgery (0.2% vs 0.6%, p = 0.076) or experienced an in-hospital major vascular complication (0.7% vs 1.4%, p = 0.026). Intensive care unit time (40.1 ± 58.4 vs 50.9 ± 72.1 hours, p < 0.001) and postprocedure length of stay (4.1 ± 3.6 vs 5.0 ± 4.5 days, p < 0.001) were significantly shorter with LA. In-hospital and 30-day all-cause mortality were lower in the LA cohort compared to the GA cohort ([1.1% vs 2.7%, p < 0.001] and [2.1% vs 3.9%, p = 0.001]). In conclusion, in the largest series of self-expanding bioprostheses for TF-TAVR, these propensity-matched cohorts demonstrate that LA is an acceptable alternative to GA with comparable success, lower safety outcomes, complications rates, and in-hospital and 30-day all-cause mortality.

A retrospective study of conscious sedation versus general anaesthesia in patients scheduled for transfemoral aortic valve implantation: A single center experience

OBJECTIVES

The current 2017 ESC/EACTS guidelines recommend transcatheter aortic valve implantations (TAVIs) as the therapy of choice for inoperable patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Most of the TAVIs worldwide are performed under general anaesthesia (GA). Although conscious sedation (CS) concepts are increasingly applied in Europe, it is still a matter of debate which concept is associated with highest amount of safety for this high-risk patient population. The aim of this single center, before-and-after study was to investigate feasibility and safety of CS compared with GA with respect to peri-procedural complications and 30-day mortality in patients scheduled for transfemoral TAVI (TF-TAVI).

METHODS

From March 2012 until September 2014, patients scheduled for the TF-TAVI procedure were included in a prospective, observational manner. From the 200 patients finally included, 107 procedures were performed under GA, using either an endotracheal tube or a laryngeal mask, and balanced anaesthesia. CS was performed in 93 patients using low-dose propofol and remifentanil.

RESULTS

Conversion to GA was needed 4 times due to procedural-related complications (4.3%), in one patient due to ongoing agitation (1.1%). The CS-group showed significantly shorter key time courses: anaesthesia time (105 [95-120] minutes vs 115 [105-140] minutes, P-value = 0.009, Mann-Whitney-U-test) and length of stay in the intensive care unit (1.6 [1.0-1.5] d vs 2.1 [1.0-2.0] d, P-value = 0.002, Mann-Whitney-U-test). The lowest mean arterial pressure was significantly higher in the CS-group compared with the GA-group (74.3 mmHg vs 55.2 mmHg, P-value <0.0001, t-test). CS was associated with less requirements of norepinephrine (0.1 μg/kg vs 2.3 μg/kg, P-value <0.0001, Mann-Whitney-U-test).

CONCLUSIONS

Our single-center data demonstrate that CS is a feasible and safe alternative, especially with respect to a higher degree of intra-procedural haemodynamic stability, and a reduced length of stay in the intensive care unit.

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.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with intracardiac echocardiography from the right internal jugular vein

Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is a useful imaging modality to guide transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The limitations of TEE include the need for general anesthesia (GA) and endotracheal intubation. In Europe, TAVR under local anesthesia (LA) is usually performed without TEE. An intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) catheter may be used as an alternative to TEE, but the catheter is usually inserted from the femoral vein (FV-ICE). There are some reports of TAVR with FV-ICE; however, there are no reports of ICE inserted from the right internal jugular vein (JV-ICE). In the first case of its kind, we successfully performed TAVR under LA with JV-ICE. JV-ICE allows for the evaluation of perioperative hemodynamics, measurement of the aortic valve complex, and assessment of major complications during the procedure without interference from the operator or fluoroscopes; these represent a distinct advantage over TEE, transthoracic echocardiography, and FV-ICE. Moreover, there is no need for the echocardiologist to use maximal barrier precautions; the catheter can be operated in the standing position, like TEE; and operability is higher than that with FV-ICE. TAVR with JV-ICE is a promising alternative to TAVR under GA with TEE and TAVR under LA with FV-ICE.

TAVI: Simplification Is the Ultimate Sophistication

Since its introduction in 2002, TAVI has evolved dramatically and is now standard of care for intermediate risk patients when the femoral approach can be implemented safely. The development of innovative transcatheter heart valves (THVs) and refinement of technical skills have contributed to the decrease in complication rates associated with TAVI⁴. Increased experience, smaller sheaths, rigorous pre-procedural planning and improved vascular closing techniques have resulted in markedly lower rates of vascular complications. The next step is the simplification of the procedure, which should contribute to a further decrease in complications, and also reduce procedural time, hospital stay as well as staff workload and costs. Moving to conscious sedation, no predilatation, no temporary pace maker and use of the radial approach as the contralateral approach are all instrumental in achieving this ultimate refinement.

Comparison of transesophageal and transthoracic echocardiography under moderate sedation for guiding transcatheter aortic valve replacement

The optimal periprocedural imaging strategy during transcathether aortic valve replacement (TAVR) performed under moderate sedation is debated. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) provides suboptimal views due to poorer resolution and patient positioning, whereas use of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) under moderate sedation is not widely utilized. The aim of our study was to compare the value of TTE in comparison with TEE guidance under moderate sedation during TAVR. The study population included 144 consecutive patients (mean age 83 ± 11 years, 78 (54%) females) who had TAVR under moderate sedation using either a TTE (n = 96) or TEE (n = 48). We compared procedural outcomes using propensity score matching. There were no significant inter-group differences in age, sex, ejection fraction, aortic valve area, pressure gradients, creatinine or type of valve used. The procedural time was significantly shorter in the TEE group (P < 0.001) and associated with a lower need for periprocedural aortograms (7.7 ± 1.9 vs 8.2 ± 1.9, P = 0.022) and a lower occurrence of acute kidney injury (1 vs 11, P = 0.047). The 1:1 propensity score matching also showed a lower procedural time (P = 0.032), number of aortograms (P = 0.014) and a trend toward lower acute kidney injury in the TEE group (P = 0.077). TAVR guidance using TEE is associated with a lower fluoroscopic time, a lower need for additional aortograms and trend in lower occurrence of post-TAVR acute kidney injury.

Use of Dexmedetomidine in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia

Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective α₂-adrenergic agonist with analgesic and sedative properties. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration approved the use of the drug for short-lasting sedation (24 h) in intensive care units (ICUs) in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation and endotracheal intubation. In October 2008, the Food and Drug Administration extended use of the drug for the sedation of nonintubated patients before and during surgical and nonsurgical procedures. In the European Union, the European Medicine Agency approved the use of dexmedetomidine in September 2011 with a single recognized indication: ICU adult patients requiring mild sedation and awakening in response to verbal stimulus. At present, the use of dexmedetomidine for sedation outside the ICU remains an off-label indication. The benefits of dexmedetomidine in critically ill patients and in cardiac, electrophysiology-related, vascular, and thoracic procedures are discussed.

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).

Bispectral index-guided sedation in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a retrospective control study

OBJECTIVE

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a minimally invasive therapy for elderly patients with severe aortic valve stenosis who were refused surgical aortic valve replacement because of the high perioperative risk. Traditionally, this procedure has been done under general anesthesia, but more recently local anesthesia and sedation have become popular. This research assessed the effectiveness of transfemoral TAVI under bispectral index (BIS)-guided sedation.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective control analysis, clinical data, including demographic characteristics, echocardiography, periprocedural data, and main complications, were collected and assessed in 113 patients undergoing TAVI through the femoral artery under general anesthesia (GA group, n=36) and under BIS-guided sedation (SED group, n=77).

RESULTS

The demographic characteristics and echocardiographic parameters between the two groups were similar (P>0.05). Two (2.6%) of patients were moved from BIS-guided sedation to general anesthesia for surgical reasons. Procedures were significantly shorter in the SED group than in the GA group ((127.10±44.43) min vs. (165.90±71.62) min, P=0.004). Patients in the SED group lost less blood and received significantly fewer red blood cells and catecholamines than those in the GA group (5.19% vs. 22.22%, P=0.017 and 67.53% vs. 97.22%, P<0.001). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter and there were fewer pulmonary complications in the SED group than in the GA group. Thirty-day mortality was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

BIS-guided sedation is a feasible and safe approach for transfemoral TAVI. The anesthesiologist should choose the best anesthetic method according to the team's experience.

Causes and temporal trends in procedural deaths after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

The causes of procedural deaths after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have been scarcely detailed.

AIMS

To assess these causes and their temporal trends since the beginning of the TAVI era.

METHODS

From October 2006 to April 2014, 601 consecutive high-risk/inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis underwent TAVI using the Edwards SAPIEN or SAPIEN XT or the Medtronic CoreValve. The transfemoral route was the default approach; the transapical or left subclavian approaches were alternative options. Patients were divided into three tertiles according to the date of the procedure.

RESULTS

Procedural death occurred in 45 patients (7.5%), with a median±standard deviation age of 83±7 years; 23 were men (51%) and the mean logistic EuroSCORE was 26±16%. The main cause of death was heart failure (n=19, 42%), followed by cardiac rupture (n=12, 27%), intensive care complications (n=9, 20%) and vascular complications (n=5, 11%). The mortality rate was higher after transapical than transfemoral TAVI (17% vs. 5%; P<0.001). The mortality rate decreased over time (11.9% in the first tertile, 6.0% in the second and 4.5% in the third [P=0.007]), driven by a reduction in heart failure-related deaths (6.5% in the first tertile vs. 1.5% in the third; P=0.011). Vascular complication-related deaths disappeared in the third tertile. However, there was no decrease in deaths related to cardiac ruptures and intensive care complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The procedural mortality rate of TAVI decreased over time, driven by the decrease in heart failure-related deaths. However, efforts should continue to prevent cardiac ruptures and improve the outcomes of patients requiring intensive care after TAVI.

Impact of Subclinical Vascular Complications Detected by Systematic Postprocedural Multidetector Computed Tomography After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Using Balloon-Expandable Edwards SAPIEN XT Heart Valve

Complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain an important issue. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of systematic postprocedural multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) to detect subclinical complications after TAVI. From October 2013 to August 2015, a total of 135 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI (n = 116) or transapical TAVI (n = 19) with Sapien XT and MDCT preprocedure and postprocedure were enrolled. Postprocedural MDCT findings were compared with the preprocedural MDCT findings. Cardiovascular complications were observed in 25.9% of patients, including 6 cases (4.5%) with major complications. Of those, clinically apparent major complications were reported in 2 cases including rupture of the sinus of Valsalva and iliac rupture. The complications in the remaining 4 cases (3.0%) included aortic dissection, aortic intramural hematoma, and left ventricular apical pseudoaneurysm, which were totally asymptomatic and only detected by MDCT. The apical pseudoaneurysm required surgical repair. Minor complications were observed in 21.5% of patients, 50% of which were subclinical. Only 1 case with femoral pseudoaneurysm required an additional procedure. Noncardiovascular findings were detected in 27.4% of patients; the most frequent were pleural effusions and atelectasis, which were predominantly observed in those treated through a transapical approach. Contrast-induced acute kidney injury after postprocedural MDCT was reported in 1 patient whose clinical course was complicated by sepsis. In conclusion, postprocedural MDCT was useful in detecting important subclinical complications that may affect the clinical course without deterioration of renal function.

Anaesthesia Techniques in Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Brief Review

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an alternative, less invasive method to use for aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients. This operation allows a faster recovery, reduced tissue damage, less postoperative pain, increased patient satisfaction, reduced intensive care unit (ICU) stay, avoidance of ICU admission, reduced hospital stay, and reduced wound infection rates. A retrograde transfemoral approach is commonly used in TAVI procedures. The role of the anaesthetist is important for a successful outcome. General or local anaesthesia, with or without conscious sedation, may be used according to patient characteristics, the presence of comorbidities, and the preference of the surgical team. There is no general consensus regarding which patients should receive general or local anaesthesia during TAVI operations; therefore, the surgical team’s preference has an important influence on the selection of anaesthetic technique. There are many studies in the literature relating to the anaesthesia technique used in TAVI operations. No matter which technique is used, anaesthetists should provide and maintain optimal haemodynamic stability during the procedure. On the other hand, anaesthetists should be cautious of possible procedural complications, such as hypotension, ventricular fibrillation, permanent pacemaker requirement, and emergency aortic valve replacement requirement.

Augmented Reality System for Ultrasound Guidance of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

OBJECTIVE

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) relies on fluoroscopy and nephrotoxic contrast medium for valve deployment. We propose an alternative guidance system using augmented reality (AR) and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) to guide TAVI deployment. The goals of this study were to determine how consistently the aortic valve annulus is defined from TEE using different aortic valve landmarks and to compare AR guidance with fluoroscopic guidance of TAVI deployment in an aortic root model.

METHODS

Magnetic tracking sensors were integrated into the TAVI catheter and TEE probe, allowing these tools to be displayed in an AR environment. Variability in identifying aortic valve commissures and cuspal nadirs was assessed using TEE aortic root images. To compare AR guidance of TAVI deployment with fluoroscopic guidance, a TAVI stent was deployed 10 times in the aortic root model using each of the two guidance systems.

RESULTS

Commissures and nadirs were both investigated as features for defining the valve annulus in the AR guidance system. The commissures were identified more consistently than the nadirs, with intraobserver variability of 2.2 and 3.8 mm, respectively, and interobserver variability of 3.3 and 4.7 mm, respectively. The precision of TAVI deployment using fluoroscopic guidance was 3.4 mm, whereas the precision of AR guidance was 2.9 mm, and its overall accuracy was 3.4 mm. This indicates that both have similar performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic valve commissures can be identified more reliably than cuspal nadirs from TEE. The AR guidance system achieved similar deployment accuracy to that of fluoroscopy while eliminating the use and consequences of nephrotoxic contrast and radiation.