Abstract:Background: The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes after spinal anesthesia (SA) versus general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing thoracic endograft placement and to evaluate the adjunctive use of cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) placement. Methods: A single-center retrospective review of patients that underwent thoracic endograft placement from 2001 to 2019 was performed. Patients were stratified based on the type of anesthesia they received: GA, SA or epidural, GA with CSFD, and SA with CSFD. Primary outcomes included 30-day mortality and length of stay (LOS). Baseline characteristics were analyzed with Student's t-test and Pearson's chi-squared test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for 30-day mortality and longer LOS. Results: A total of 333 patients underwent thoracic endograft placement; 104 patients received SA, 180 patients received GA, 30 patients received GA and CSFD, and 19 patients received SA and CSFD. Of the total patients, 16.2% underwent thoracic endograft placement for type B aortic dissection, 3.3% for type A aortic dissection, and 12.3% for penetrating ulcer. The mean age of the study population was 68.7 years old. Patients undergoing SA were older with a mean age of 73.4 years versus 64.7 years for patients undergoing GA (P < 0.001). Spinal anesthesia (SA) was preferred in patients at high risk for GA (>75 years old: 52.9% vs. 33.3%, P < 0.001; renal comorbidities: 20.6% vs. 10.6%, P = 0.03, and current smokers: 26.7% vs. 9.6%, P < 0.001). Length of stay (LOS) was decreased in the SA group (4.29 days vs. 9.70 days, P < 0.001). There was a lower incidence of spinal cord ischemia in the SA group (1.0% vs. 2.2%, P = 0.44), as well as significantly decreased 30-day mortality (0% vs. 5.6%, P = 0.01), reintervention (19.2% vs. 26.8%, P = 0.02), and return to the operating room (6.8% vs. 12.7%, P = 0.02). Of the 19 patients that had SA + CSFD, there were no signs and symptoms of spinal cord ischemia and decreased incidence of perioperative complications (0% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.01). There was no difference in the risk for intraoperative complications, neurologic complications, or 30-day mortality between GA + CSFD patients versus SA + CSFD patients. Age >75 (P = 0.002), intraoperative complications (P < 0.001), and perioperative complications (P = 0.02) were associated with increased mortality after thoracic endograft placement per multivariate logistic regression analysis. Conclusions: Spinal anesthesia (SA) in select high-risk patients was associated with reduced 30-day mortality, neurologic complications, and LOS compared to GA. The concurrent use of spinal drainage and SA had satisfactory results compared to spinal drainage and GA.

Choice of anesthesia technique is associated with earlier hospital discharge and reduced costs after transcatheter transfemoral aortic valve implantation

Optimizing Anesthetic Selection in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Striking a Delicate Balance between Efficacy and Minimal Intervention

Comparative Efficacy of Local and General Anesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Whether monitored anesthesia care is the optimal anesthetic strategy for transcatheter aortic valve implantation surgery? a meta-analysis and systematic review

Conscious sedation versus general anesthesia for transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Bispectral Index-Guided Sedation in Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: a Retrospective Control Study

Use of Spinal Anesthesia during Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair

30-Day Outcomes after Surgical or Transapical Aortic Valve Replacement in Symptomatic Aortic Regurgitation

Reducing Length of Hospital Stay Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Anesthesia management of patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A retrospective analysis of single center

An Analysis Regarding the Article: Insight Into the Optimal Timing of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

A review regarding the article 'Local versus General Anaesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomised and Propensity-Score Matched Studies.'

Comparative efficacy of totally thoracoscopic, mini-thoracotomy, and mini-sternotomy approaches in aortic valve replacement

Early and Mid-Term Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Postoperative Pain Management Strategies and Delirium After Transapical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Evaluation of Anaesthetic Approaches in Transcatheter Aortic Valv Implantation Procedures

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

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation by Intercostal Access: Initial Experience with a No-Touch Technique

Direct Variable Cost Comparison of Monitored Anesthesia Care Versus Wide Awake Local Anesthesia No Tournique Carpal Tunnel Release: A Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing Analysis

Complete transcatheter versus complete surgical treatment in patients with aortic valve stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease: Study-level meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data

Minimally-invasive versus transcatheter aortic valve implantation: systematic review with meta-analysis of propensity-matched studies