Search

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.

Background: Ischemic myocardial damage accompanying coronary artery bypass graft surgery remains a clinical challenge. We investigated whether xenon anesthesia could limit myocardial damage in coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients, as has been reported for animal ischemia models., Methods: In 17 university hospitals in France, Germany, Italy, and The Netherlands, low-risk elective, on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients were randomized to receive xenon, sevoflurane, or propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia for anesthesia maintenance. The primary outcome was the cardiac troponin I concentration in the blood 24 h postsurgery. The noninferiority margin for the mean difference in cardiac troponin I release between the xenon and sevoflurane groups was less than 0.15 ng/ml. Secondary outcomes were the safety and feasibility of xenon anesthesia., Results: The first patient included at each center received xenon anesthesia for practical reasons. For all other patients, anesthesia maintenance was randomized (intention-to-treat: n = 492; per-protocol/without major protocol deviation: n = 446). Median 24-h postoperative cardiac troponin I concentrations (ng/ml [interquartile range]) were 1.14 [0.76 to 2.10] with xenon, 1.30 [0.78 to 2.67] with sevoflurane, and 1.48 [0.94 to 2.78] with total intravenous anesthesia [per-protocol]). The mean difference in cardiac troponin I release between xenon and sevoflurane was -0.09 ng/ml (95% CI, -0.30 to 0.11; per-protocol: P = 0.02). Postoperative cardiac troponin I release was significantly less with xenon than with total intravenous anesthesia (intention-to-treat: P = 0.05; per-protocol: P = 0.02). Perioperative variables and postoperative outcomes were comparable across all groups, with no safety concerns., Conclusions: In postoperative cardiac troponin I release, xenon was noninferior to sevoflurane in low-risk, on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients. Only with xenon was cardiac troponin I release less than with total intravenous anesthesia. Xenon anesthesia appeared safe and feasible.

Supraglottic airway devices are developed with increasing frequency following the overwhelming success of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA). In contrast to the first generation devices such as the 'classic' LMA and the laryngeal tube second generation devices usually offer an oesophageal drainage tube and/or an improved oropharyngeal leak pressure during positive pressure ventilation such as the laryngeal mask ProSeal and the laryngeal tube S. Recently the disposable versions of these supraglottic airway devices and the novel I-Gel mask have gained increasing interest. Both the LMA and the PLMA have been shown to be perfectly suitable for routine anaesthesia and emergency airway management. While the lacking protection against aspiration is still considered a major limitation of the LMA, the value of airway devices with an oesophageal drainage tube in this respect remains untermined at present., (© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York.)