Search

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the standard of care for many patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality during surgical aortic valve replacement. However, there is still no general consensus regarding the use of general anesthesia (GA) versus local anesthesia with sedation (non-GA) during the TAVI procedure. Using propensity scorematching analysis, we analyzed the characteristics and outcomes of patients who underwent TAVI with either GA (n = 245) or non-GA (n = 245) in the fully monitored, international, CoreValve ADVANCE Study. No statistically significant differences existed between the non-GA and GA groups in all-cause mortality (25.4% vs 23.9%, p = 0.78), cardiovascular mortality (16.4% vs 16.6%, p = 0.92), or stroke (5.2% vs 6.9%, p = 0.57) through 2-year follow-up. Major vascular complications were more common in the non-GA group. Total hospital stay was similar between the 2 groups. Conversion from non-GA to GA occurred in 13 patients (5.3%) because of procedural complications in 9 patients and discomfort or restlessness in 4 patients. Most procedural complications were related to valve positioning or vascular issues. Two of the 13 converted patients died during the procedure. Both GA and non-GA are widely used in real-world TAVI practice, and the decision appears to be guided by only a few patient-related factors and dominated by local and national practice. The outcomes of both anesthesia modes are equally good. When conversion from non-GA did occur, the complication requiring GA affected outcomes.

Muscle potentials as a cause of pacemaker malfunction are often unrecognized, because control examinations are usually performed without physical exercise. Two observations are cited to illustrate how malfunctioning of different modes of stimulation can be caused by interference from muscle potentials. In addition to the known suppression of impulse production, fixed-rate stimulation may occur. These observations indicate that pacemaker function should be tested also during physical activity. Any malfunction can almost always be stopped by re-programming amplifier sensitivity.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the mainstay for highrisk or inoperable patients with symptomatic aortic valve stenosis, and research regarding the use of transcatheter valves in intermediate or low-risk patients is currently ongoing. The aim of this article is to provide comprehensive insight into the anesthetic management of patients undergoing TAVI and to highlight possible gaps in the current knowledge. One important procedural characteristic that is imperative to consider is the type of anesthesia being used and its possible complications. Increasingly, experienced centers have changed from general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation to local anesthesia with sedation, especially when the transfemoral access route is used for TAVI. There is still debate regarding what type of anesthesia should be used in the procedure, and the lack of randomized data makes it even more challenging for the operators © 2016 Hellenic Society of Cardiology.

This study compared 3-year clinical outcomes of patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score ≤7% to those of patients with a score >7%. Data were drawn from the ADVANCE study, a multinational post-market clinical trial that enrolled real-world patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with the CoreValve bioprosthesis. Events were independently adjudicated using Valve Academic Research Consortium1 definitions. A total of 996 patients were implanted: STS ≤7% (n = 697, median STS 4.3%, interquartile range 3.1% to 5.4%) and STS >7% (n = 298, median STS 9.7%, interquartile range 8.0% to 12.4%). At 3 years, the STS ≤7% group had lower rates of all-cause mortality (28.6 vs 45.9, p 7% group. No differences were observed in cerebrovascular accidents, vascular complications, bleeding, or myocardial infarction. In patients with STS ≤7%, mortality at 3 years was higher in those with moderate or severe aortic regurgitation (AR) at discharge than in those with mild or less AR (39.9% vs 22.9%; hazard ratio 1.98; 95% confidence interval 1.37 to 2.86; p 7% (42.9% vs 44.6%, moderate/severe vs mild/less; hazard ratio 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.62 to 1.75; p = 0.861; p for interaction = 0.047). In conclusion, patients with STS ≤7% had lower rates of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality at 3 years after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Complication rates were low and stable in both groups, demonstrating the safety of this procedure for patients at various levels of surgical risk.