1. Comparing outcomes of general anesthesia and monitored anesthesia care during <scp>transcatheter</scp> aortic valve replacement: The Cleveland Clinic Foundation experience
- Author
-
Nikolaos J. Skubas, Kinjal Banerjee, Anand Mehta, Sanchit Chawla, Andrej Alfirevic, Hassan Mehmood Lak, James Yun, Samir R. Kapadia, Krystof Andress, Shinya Unai, Grant W. Reed, Yasser Sammour, Neha Gupta, Amar Krishnaswamy, Rama Dilip Gajulapalli, Shiva Sale, Jimmy Kerrigan, and Lars G. Svensson
- Subjects
Transcatheter aortic ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Anesthesia, General ,030204 cardiovascular system & hematology ,law.invention ,Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Valve replacement ,Risk Factors ,law ,medicine ,Humans ,Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Retrospective Studies ,business.industry ,Aortic Valve Stenosis ,General Medicine ,Length of Stay ,Intensive care unit ,Radiation exposure ,Treatment Outcome ,Aortic Valve ,Fluoroscopy ,Anesthesia ,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine ,business ,Hospital stay ,Lower mortality - Abstract
BACKGROUND Monitored anesthesia care (MAC) has become more widely used during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to avoid the complications of general anesthesia (GA). METHODS We included consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral-TAVR at our institution between January 2012 and April 2017. We compared outcomes with GA versus MAC. RESULTS Of 998 patients, MAC was used in 43.9%. MAC was associated with shorter procedural time (96.9 ± 30.9 vs. 135 ± 64.6 mins; p
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF