Local versus general anesthesia for transfemoral aortic valve implantation
Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) represents a novel option for elderly with severe aortic valve stenosis who are denied surgical aortic valve replacement due to high perioperative risk. While transfemoral TAVI generally is being performed in general anesthesia (GA), TAVI und...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical research in cardiology 2012, Vol.101 (1), p.45-53 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 53 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 45 |
container_title | Clinical research in cardiology |
container_volume | 101 |
creator | Motloch, Lukas J. Rottlaender, Dennis Reda, Sara Larbig, Robert Bruns, Marie Müller-Ehmsen, Jochen Strauch, Justus Madershahian, Navid Erdmann, Erland Wahlers, Thorsten Hoppe, Uta C. |
description | Background
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) represents a novel option for elderly with severe aortic valve stenosis who are denied surgical aortic valve replacement due to high perioperative risk. While transfemoral TAVI generally is being performed in general anesthesia (GA), TAVI under local anesthesia plus mild sedation (LAPS) might be an effective and safe alternative.
Methods
In a single-centre analysis, we assessed clinical data, preoperative risk scores (STS-Score), echocardiography, periprocedural data and labor costs in 74 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI under GA (
n
= 33) and LAPS (
n
= 41).
Results
Patients who underwent TAVI in LAPS presented significantly more often with pulmonary hypertension and impaired renal function, and tended to have a higher STS score and more severe symptoms (higher NYHA class) versus the GA group. There were no significant differences in procedure-related 30-day mortality or complications between groups. The peak systolic and mean central aortic pressure were significantly higher in the LAPS group, while at the same time these patients required significantly less often periprocedural adrenergic support. Intervention time was shorter in the LAPS group due to avoidance of surgical cut-down of the access site. Moreover, total procedure time was significantly shorter and labor costs were lower in the LAPS group. Patients who underwent TAVI in LAPS could be mobilized significantly earlier.
Conclusion
Our study indicates that TAVI under LAPS is as effective and safe as TAVI under GA. Furthermore, total procedure time, intervention time and labor costs could be reduced by LAPS. Mobilization of patients could be achieved earlier. We therefore consider LAPS to be favorable in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00392-011-0362-8 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_914670987</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>914670987</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-db21fc460c5082c7ae66c305f7dfc826e03d4733352ada8f10e56c3f1e50b1b83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kF1LwzAUhoMobk5_gDdSvPGqepK0aXopw08G3uh1yNKT2dE2M2kH_nszNycIXiWH8-TNy0PIOYVrClDcBABeshQoTYELlsoDMqZSxEmU7HB_l9mInISwBMgp8OyYjBgtOS1FNibPM2d0k6zRhyEkC-zQx1F3GPp3DLVOrPNJ73UXLLbue-d8X5tkrZs1JnW7anTX67523Sk5sroJeLY7J-Tt_u51-pjOXh6eprez1PAC-rSaM2pNJsDkIJkpNAphOOS2qKyRTCDwKis45znTlZaWAuYRsBRzmNO55BNytc1defcxxKKqrYPBJhZBNwRV0kwUUMoikpd_yKUbfBfLRYgXTHKWRYhuIeNdCB6tWvm61f5TUVAbzWqrWUXNaqNZbSpc7IKHeYvV_sWP1wiwLRDiqlug__35_9QvAPuHzw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>913728324</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Local versus general anesthesia for transfemoral aortic valve implantation</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Motloch, Lukas J. ; Rottlaender, Dennis ; Reda, Sara ; Larbig, Robert ; Bruns, Marie ; Müller-Ehmsen, Jochen ; Strauch, Justus ; Madershahian, Navid ; Erdmann, Erland ; Wahlers, Thorsten ; Hoppe, Uta C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Motloch, Lukas J. ; Rottlaender, Dennis ; Reda, Sara ; Larbig, Robert ; Bruns, Marie ; Müller-Ehmsen, Jochen ; Strauch, Justus ; Madershahian, Navid ; Erdmann, Erland ; Wahlers, Thorsten ; Hoppe, Uta C.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) represents a novel option for elderly with severe aortic valve stenosis who are denied surgical aortic valve replacement due to high perioperative risk. While transfemoral TAVI generally is being performed in general anesthesia (GA), TAVI under local anesthesia plus mild sedation (LAPS) might be an effective and safe alternative.
Methods
In a single-centre analysis, we assessed clinical data, preoperative risk scores (STS-Score), echocardiography, periprocedural data and labor costs in 74 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI under GA (
n
= 33) and LAPS (
n
= 41).
Results
Patients who underwent TAVI in LAPS presented significantly more often with pulmonary hypertension and impaired renal function, and tended to have a higher STS score and more severe symptoms (higher NYHA class) versus the GA group. There were no significant differences in procedure-related 30-day mortality or complications between groups. The peak systolic and mean central aortic pressure were significantly higher in the LAPS group, while at the same time these patients required significantly less often periprocedural adrenergic support. Intervention time was shorter in the LAPS group due to avoidance of surgical cut-down of the access site. Moreover, total procedure time was significantly shorter and labor costs were lower in the LAPS group. Patients who underwent TAVI in LAPS could be mobilized significantly earlier.
Conclusion
Our study indicates that TAVI under LAPS is as effective and safe as TAVI under GA. Furthermore, total procedure time, intervention time and labor costs could be reduced by LAPS. Mobilization of patients could be achieved earlier. We therefore consider LAPS to be favorable in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1861-0684</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1861-0692</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00392-011-0362-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21931964</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Aged, 80 and over ; Anesthesia, General - adverse effects ; Anesthesia, General - methods ; Anesthesia, Local - adverse effects ; Anesthesia, Local - methods ; Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery ; Cardiac Catheterization - methods ; Cardiology ; Female ; Femoral Artery ; Follow-Up Studies ; Health Care Costs ; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects ; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - economics ; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - methods ; Humans ; Hypertension, Pulmonary - epidemiology ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Original Paper ; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology ; Renal Insufficiency - epidemiology ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Clinical research in cardiology, 2012, Vol.101 (1), p.45-53</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag 2011</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-db21fc460c5082c7ae66c305f7dfc826e03d4733352ada8f10e56c3f1e50b1b83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-db21fc460c5082c7ae66c305f7dfc826e03d4733352ada8f10e56c3f1e50b1b83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00392-011-0362-8$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00392-011-0362-8$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923,41486,42555,51317</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21931964$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Motloch, Lukas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rottlaender, Dennis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reda, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Larbig, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruns, Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Müller-Ehmsen, Jochen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strauch, Justus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Madershahian, Navid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Erdmann, Erland</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wahlers, Thorsten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoppe, Uta C.</creatorcontrib><title>Local versus general anesthesia for transfemoral aortic valve implantation</title><title>Clinical research in cardiology</title><addtitle>Clin Res Cardiol</addtitle><addtitle>Clin Res Cardiol</addtitle><description>Background
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) represents a novel option for elderly with severe aortic valve stenosis who are denied surgical aortic valve replacement due to high perioperative risk. While transfemoral TAVI generally is being performed in general anesthesia (GA), TAVI under local anesthesia plus mild sedation (LAPS) might be an effective and safe alternative.
Methods
In a single-centre analysis, we assessed clinical data, preoperative risk scores (STS-Score), echocardiography, periprocedural data and labor costs in 74 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI under GA (
n
= 33) and LAPS (
n
= 41).
Results
Patients who underwent TAVI in LAPS presented significantly more often with pulmonary hypertension and impaired renal function, and tended to have a higher STS score and more severe symptoms (higher NYHA class) versus the GA group. There were no significant differences in procedure-related 30-day mortality or complications between groups. The peak systolic and mean central aortic pressure were significantly higher in the LAPS group, while at the same time these patients required significantly less often periprocedural adrenergic support. Intervention time was shorter in the LAPS group due to avoidance of surgical cut-down of the access site. Moreover, total procedure time was significantly shorter and labor costs were lower in the LAPS group. Patients who underwent TAVI in LAPS could be mobilized significantly earlier.
Conclusion
Our study indicates that TAVI under LAPS is as effective and safe as TAVI under GA. Furthermore, total procedure time, intervention time and labor costs could be reduced by LAPS. Mobilization of patients could be achieved earlier. We therefore consider LAPS to be favorable in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI.</description><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Anesthesia, General - adverse effects</subject><subject>Anesthesia, General - methods</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Local - adverse effects</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Local - methods</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery</subject><subject>Cardiac Catheterization - methods</subject><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Femoral Artery</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Health Care Costs</subject><subject>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects</subject><subject>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - economics</subject><subject>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hypertension, Pulmonary - epidemiology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Renal Insufficiency - epidemiology</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1861-0684</issn><issn>1861-0692</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kF1LwzAUhoMobk5_gDdSvPGqepK0aXopw08G3uh1yNKT2dE2M2kH_nszNycIXiWH8-TNy0PIOYVrClDcBABeshQoTYELlsoDMqZSxEmU7HB_l9mInISwBMgp8OyYjBgtOS1FNibPM2d0k6zRhyEkC-zQx1F3GPp3DLVOrPNJ73UXLLbue-d8X5tkrZs1JnW7anTX67523Sk5sroJeLY7J-Tt_u51-pjOXh6eprez1PAC-rSaM2pNJsDkIJkpNAphOOS2qKyRTCDwKis45znTlZaWAuYRsBRzmNO55BNytc1defcxxKKqrYPBJhZBNwRV0kwUUMoikpd_yKUbfBfLRYgXTHKWRYhuIeNdCB6tWvm61f5TUVAbzWqrWUXNaqNZbSpc7IKHeYvV_sWP1wiwLRDiqlug__35_9QvAPuHzw</recordid><startdate>2012</startdate><enddate>2012</enddate><creator>Motloch, Lukas J.</creator><creator>Rottlaender, Dennis</creator><creator>Reda, Sara</creator><creator>Larbig, Robert</creator><creator>Bruns, Marie</creator><creator>Müller-Ehmsen, Jochen</creator><creator>Strauch, Justus</creator><creator>Madershahian, Navid</creator><creator>Erdmann, Erland</creator><creator>Wahlers, Thorsten</creator><creator>Hoppe, Uta C.</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2012</creationdate><title>Local versus general anesthesia for transfemoral aortic valve implantation</title><author>Motloch, Lukas J. ; Rottlaender, Dennis ; Reda, Sara ; Larbig, Robert ; Bruns, Marie ; Müller-Ehmsen, Jochen ; Strauch, Justus ; Madershahian, Navid ; Erdmann, Erland ; Wahlers, Thorsten ; Hoppe, Uta C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-db21fc460c5082c7ae66c305f7dfc826e03d4733352ada8f10e56c3f1e50b1b83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Anesthesia, General - adverse effects</topic><topic>Anesthesia, General - methods</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Local - adverse effects</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Local - methods</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery</topic><topic>Cardiac Catheterization - methods</topic><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Femoral Artery</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Health Care Costs</topic><topic>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects</topic><topic>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - economics</topic><topic>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hypertension, Pulmonary - epidemiology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Renal Insufficiency - epidemiology</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Motloch, Lukas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rottlaender, Dennis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reda, Sara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Larbig, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruns, Marie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Müller-Ehmsen, Jochen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strauch, Justus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Madershahian, Navid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Erdmann, Erland</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wahlers, Thorsten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoppe, Uta C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical research in cardiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Motloch, Lukas J.</au><au>Rottlaender, Dennis</au><au>Reda, Sara</au><au>Larbig, Robert</au><au>Bruns, Marie</au><au>Müller-Ehmsen, Jochen</au><au>Strauch, Justus</au><au>Madershahian, Navid</au><au>Erdmann, Erland</au><au>Wahlers, Thorsten</au><au>Hoppe, Uta C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Local versus general anesthesia for transfemoral aortic valve implantation</atitle><jtitle>Clinical research in cardiology</jtitle><stitle>Clin Res Cardiol</stitle><addtitle>Clin Res Cardiol</addtitle><date>2012</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>101</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>45</spage><epage>53</epage><pages>45-53</pages><issn>1861-0684</issn><eissn>1861-0692</eissn><abstract>Background
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) represents a novel option for elderly with severe aortic valve stenosis who are denied surgical aortic valve replacement due to high perioperative risk. While transfemoral TAVI generally is being performed in general anesthesia (GA), TAVI under local anesthesia plus mild sedation (LAPS) might be an effective and safe alternative.
Methods
In a single-centre analysis, we assessed clinical data, preoperative risk scores (STS-Score), echocardiography, periprocedural data and labor costs in 74 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI under GA (
n
= 33) and LAPS (
n
= 41).
Results
Patients who underwent TAVI in LAPS presented significantly more often with pulmonary hypertension and impaired renal function, and tended to have a higher STS score and more severe symptoms (higher NYHA class) versus the GA group. There were no significant differences in procedure-related 30-day mortality or complications between groups. The peak systolic and mean central aortic pressure were significantly higher in the LAPS group, while at the same time these patients required significantly less often periprocedural adrenergic support. Intervention time was shorter in the LAPS group due to avoidance of surgical cut-down of the access site. Moreover, total procedure time was significantly shorter and labor costs were lower in the LAPS group. Patients who underwent TAVI in LAPS could be mobilized significantly earlier.
Conclusion
Our study indicates that TAVI under LAPS is as effective and safe as TAVI under GA. Furthermore, total procedure time, intervention time and labor costs could be reduced by LAPS. Mobilization of patients could be achieved earlier. We therefore consider LAPS to be favorable in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>21931964</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00392-011-0362-8</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1861-0684 |
ispartof | Clinical research in cardiology, 2012, Vol.101 (1), p.45-53 |
issn | 1861-0684 1861-0692 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_914670987 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Aged, 80 and over Anesthesia, General - adverse effects Anesthesia, General - methods Anesthesia, Local - adverse effects Anesthesia, Local - methods Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery Cardiac Catheterization - methods Cardiology Female Femoral Artery Follow-Up Studies Health Care Costs Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - economics Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - methods Humans Hypertension, Pulmonary - epidemiology Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Original Paper Postoperative Complications - epidemiology Renal Insufficiency - epidemiology Time Factors |
title | Local versus general anesthesia for transfemoral aortic valve implantation |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T14%3A57%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Local%20versus%20general%20anesthesia%20for%20transfemoral%20aortic%20valve%20implantation&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20research%20in%20cardiology&rft.au=Motloch,%20Lukas%20J.&rft.date=2012&rft.volume=101&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=45&rft.epage=53&rft.pages=45-53&rft.issn=1861-0684&rft.eissn=1861-0692&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00392-011-0362-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E914670987%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=913728324&rft_id=info:pmid/21931964&rfr_iscdi=true |