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

Lili Xie,Zekun Lang,Ying Liu,Haihong Yue,Qiaoli Chen,Guiyan Tao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-024-02834-w

IF: 2.376

2024-11-28

BMC Anesthesiology

Abstract:To explore whether monitored anesthesia care is more beneficial to the outcome of transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

anesthesiology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

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

Kahtan Fadah,Seyed Khalafi,Miller Corey,Jose Sotelo,Ahmed Farag,Tariq Siddiqui,Mehran Abolbashari

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/4217162

IF: 1.99

2024-02-29

Cardiology Research and Practice

Abstract:Patients with severe calcific native aortic valve stenosis (AS) who require valve replacement have two options, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). TAVR was approved in late 2011 for extremely high-risk patients and was subsequently approved for high-risk (2012), intermediate-risk (2016), and low-risk (2019) patients. In 2019, TAVR procedures surpassed SAVR procedures for the first time in the United States. The approach to anesthesia for this procedure has also evolved. Initially, general anesthesia (GA) was preferred, but currently, conscious sedation (CS) is favored. This review aims to clarify the indications and contraindications for both approaches, as well as the advantages of one approach over the other. Recent studies show that conscious sedation has better outcomes in terms of all-cause mortality, procedure complications such as stroke, myocardial infarction, infection requiring antibiotics, acute kidney injury, and the need for inotropes or vasopressors.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
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.'

Hu Li,Jinfeng Li,Jianxin Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102629

IF: 16.464

2024-05-09

Current Problems in Cardiology

Abstract:Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a promising treatment strategy for high-risk surgical patients, and trials investigating its effectiveness in intermediate- and lower-risk patients are underway. Data are inconsistent regarding the superiority of using local anesthesia with conscious sedation alone versus general anesthesia (GA) as the anesthesia management of choice for elderly frail patients. Historically, TAVI procedure is performed under GA with transesophageal echocardiography. This approach gives operators stable hemodynamic control of the patient and helps decrease the risk of many of the operation's documented complications, including paravalvular leak and valve malpositioning. However, some studies have criticized the dependence of GA on mechanical ventilation and an increased need for catecholamine and/or vasopressor agents. Alternatively, to further capitalize on the minimally invasive nature of TAVI, some authors have advocated for the use of local anesthesia (LA) and/or conscious sedation approach, which would decrease procedure time, length of hospital stay, and minimize the need for postoperative inotropes. Ultimately and at present, the choice of anesthesia is based on the personal experience and preference of the Heart Team involved in the TAVI procedure, which will dictate the best possible management plan for each patient. Many patients currently undergoing TAVI are elderly and have multiple comorbidities, making their care complex. Anesthetic care is shifting from GA to sedation and regional block, but life-threatening complications are still relatively common and safety during planning and conduct of these procedures by the heart team, with the anesthesiologist at the center, is paramount.

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

Lulu Gao,Baihan Jin,Ce Chao,Bin Wang,Xiaoying Zhang,Jiang Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1532/hsf.4631

2022-05-31

Abstract:Background: This meta-analysis aimed to compare the potential effects of local anesthesia (LA) and general anesthesia (GA) for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Measurements: All relevant studies were searched from Pubmed, EMbase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library (January 1, 2016, to June 1, 2021). The main outcomes of this literature meta-analysis were 30-day mortality, procedural time, new pacemaker implantation, total stay in the hospital, use of the vasoactive drug, and intra-and postoperative complications and emergencies, including conversion to open, myocardial infarction, pulmonary complication, vascular complication, renal injury/failure, stroke, transesophageal echocardiography, life-threatening/major bleeding, cardiac tamponade, and emergency PCI. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) together with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Results: A total of 17 studies, including 20938 patients, in the final analysis, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Intra-and postoperative complications (myocardial infarction, vascular complication, renal injury/failure, stroke, and cardiac tamponade) undergoing TAVI in severe AS patients under GA do not offer a significant difference compared with LA. No differences were observed between LA and GA for new pacemaker implantation, total stay in the hospital, transesophageal echocardiography, and emergency PCI. LA has lower mortality compared with GA (RR 0.69, P = 0.600), pulmonary complications (RR 0.54, P = 0.278), life-threatening/major bleeding (RR 0.85, P = 0.855), and lower times of conversion to open (RR 0.22, P = 0.746). LA has many advantages, including a shorter procedure duration (MD=-0.38, P = 0.000) and reduction of the use of the vasoactive drug (RR 0.57, P = 0.000). Conclusions: For TAVI, both LA with or without sedation and GA are feasible and safe. LA appears a feasible alternative to GA for AS patients undergoing TAVI.
Bispectral Index-Guided Sedation in Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: a Retrospective Control Study

Wei He,Rong-rong Huang,Qing-yu Shi,Xian-bao Liu,Jian-an Wang,Min Yan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.b1600522

2017-01-01

Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE B

Abstract:Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a minimally invasive therapy for elderly patients with severe aortic valve stenosis who were refused surgical aortic valve replacement because of the high perioperative risk. Traditionally, this procedure has been done under general anesthesia, but more recently local anesthesia and sedation have become popular. This research assessed the effectiveness of transfemoral TAVI under bispectral index (BIS)-guided sedation. In this single-center retrospective control analysis, clinical data, including demographic characteristics, echocardiography, periprocedural data, and main complications, were collected and assessed in 113 patients undergoing TAVI through the femoral artery under general anesthesia (GA group, n=36) and under BIS-guided sedation (SED group, n=77). The demographic characteristics and echocardiographic parameters between the two groups were similar (P>0.05). Two (2.6%) of patients were moved from BIS-guided sedation to general anesthesia for surgical reasons. Procedures were significantly shorter in the SED group than in the GA group ((127.10±44.43) min vs. (165.90±71.62) min, P=0.004). Patients in the SED group lost less blood and received significantly fewer red blood cells and catecholamines than those in the GA group (5.19% vs. 22.22%, P=0.017 and 67.53% vs. 97.22%, P<0.001). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter and there were fewer pulmonary complications in the SED group than in the GA group. Thirty-day mortality was similar between the two groups. BIS-guided sedation is a feasible and safe approach for transfemoral TAVI. The anesthesiologist should choose the best anesthetic method according to the team’s experience.
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Bicuspid Vs. Tricuspid Aortic Stenosis among Patients at Low Surgical Risk in China: from the Multicenter National NTCVR Database

Nanchao Hong,Wenzhi Pan,Xianbao Liu,Daxin Zhou,Jianan Wang,Junbo Ge

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12010387

IF: 3.9

2023-01-01

Journal of Clinical Medicine

Abstract:Background: This study aims to compare the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with self-expandable valves for bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) vs. tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) stenosis patients who are at low surgical risk. Methods: Participants were enrolled from 36 centers in China between January 2017 and December 2021. The primary endpoint event was all-cause mortality and all stroke at 30 days. Results: Among 389 patients at low surgical risk that underwent TAVR, 229 patients were BAV stenosis (mean age, 72.9 years; 65.1% men). There was no significant difference in the rate of all-cause death between two populations at 30 days. However, the rate of all stroke was significantly higher in the BAV group at 30 days (3.3% vs. 0%; odds ratio (OR), 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94 to 0.99); p = 0.044). By multivariate logistic regression analysis, trans-carotid access was associated with a higher all stroke rate at 30 days (OR, 29.20 (95% CI, 3.97 to 215.1); p = 0.001). Conclusions: In this national registry-based study, patients treated for BAV vs. TAV stenosis had no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days, but trans-carotid access was associated with a higher all stroke rate after TAVR at 30 days.
[Value of Preoperative Assessment on Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Procedure with High-Pitch Dual-Source Computed Tomography Angiography].

Qijing Zhou,Xianbao Liu,Aiqiang Dong,Zhaoxia Pu,Wei He,Yan Feng,Jian'an Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3758.2014.10.009

2014-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the value of preoperative assessment on transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) procedure with high-pitch dual-source computed tomography angiography (CTA).METHODS:Seventeen consecutive patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis underwent TAVI in our department from December 2012 to December 2013 were examined by 128-slice prospective ECG-triggered high-pitch spiral CTA and the clinical data were analyzed. Aortic annulus, sinus of Valsalva, sinotubular junction, ascending aorta and native leaflet to coronary ostium length were measured. Peripheral vascular access was evaluated. Then the patients were assessed on the suitability for TAVI procedure and prosthetic valve sizes.RESULTS:Mean diameter of the aortic annulus was (25.7 ± 2.0) mm, perimeter mean diameter was (26.4 ± 2.0) mm, area mean diameter was (25.4 ± 1.9) mm. Mean diameter of sinus of Valsalva was (34.0 ± 3.8) mm. Mean diameter of sinotubular junction was (30.5 ± 3.2) mm. Mean diameter of ascending aorta was (37.8 ± 2.8) mm. The length from native leaflet to left coronary ostium was (14.0 ± 2.0) mm, and the length from native leaflet to right coronary ostium was (15.9 ± 3.6) mm. Mean diameter of left iliac arteries was (7.5 ± 1.4) mm. Mean diameter of right iliac arteries was (7.4 ± 1.2) mm. Mean diameter of left femoral arteries was (7.4 ± 1.2) mm. Mean diameter of right femoral arteries was (7.3 ± 1.3) mm. One patient was considered ineligible for TAVI because of large aortic annulus diameter. Three patients died prior to TAVI. Two patients refused to undergo TAVI. Eleven patients underwent TAVI, 26# prosthetic valve was implanted in 1 patient, 29# prosthetic valve implanted in 6 patients, 31# prosthetic valve implanted in 4 patients. Prosthetic valve implantation was successful in 9 patients and only mild or trace perivalvular leakage was observed in these patients. Moderate perivalvular leakage were observed in 2 patients because of the location of implantation was too low, and perivalvular leakage was significantly reduced after re-implantation with same size prosthetic valve at a higher location.CONCLUSIONS:CTA can be used to evaluate the aortic root anatomy and vascular access, and help to choose the right size of prosthetic valve. CTA has an important practical value in preoperative screening of TAVI procedure.
Percutaneous versus surgical approach to aortic valve replacement with coronary revascularization: A systematic review andmeta-analysis

Yujian Guo,Wei Zhang,Haibo Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02676591231178894

2023-05-24

Perfusion

Abstract:Objective: The optimal treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and complex coronary artery disease (CAD) remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from its inception up to 17 December 2022 for studies that assessed TAVR + PCI versus SAVR + CABG in patients with AS and CAD. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality. Results: Six observational studies including 135,003 patients assessing TAVI + PCI (n = 6988) versus SAVR + CABG (n = 128,015) were included. Compared to SAVR + CABG, TAVR + PCI was not significantly associated with perioperative mortality (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.48-1.21; p = 0.25), vascular complications (RR, 1.85; 95% CI, 0.72-4.71; p = 0.20), acute kidney injury (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.73-1.33; p = 0.95), myocardial infraction (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.30-1.77; p = 0.49), or stroke (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.74-1.02; p = 0.09). TAVR + PCI significantly reduced the incidence of major bleeding (RR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.24-0.36; p < 0.01) and length of hospital stay (MD, -1.60; 95% CI, -2.45 to -0.76; p < 0.01), but increased the incidence of pacemaker implantation (RR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.88-2.19; p < 0.01). At follow-up, TAVR + PCI was significantly associated with coronary reintervention (RR, 3.17; 95% CI, 1.03-9.71; p = 0.04) and a reduced rate of long-term survival (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.94; p < 0.01). Conclusions: In patients with AS and CAD, TAVR + PCI did not increase perioperative mortality, but increased the rates of coronary reintervention and long-term mortality.
Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Previous Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

Yi-ming Li,Jia-yu Tsauo,Kai-yu Jia,Yan-biao Liao,Fan Xia,Zheng-gang Zhao,Mao Chen,Yong Peng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2020.612155

IF: 3.6

2021-02-10

Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine

Abstract:Background: Many patients who have aortic stenosis and are transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) candidates have underwent prior cardiac surgery (PCS). The aim of this study was to provide a robust summary comparison between patients with PCS who underwent TAVR vs. surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published articles on PubMed/Medline, Ovid, EMBASE, and Scopus from 2002 to 2019. Results: A total of 13 studies were finally included, yielding a total of 23,148 participants. There was no statistical difference with 30-day [OR: 1.02 (0.86–1.21)] or 1-year mortality [OR: 1.18 (0.86–1.61)] between the two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that high-risk patients who underwent TAVR with the transapical approach were associated with increased risk of mortality [OR: 1.45 (1.00–2.11)]. However, those who underwent TAVR with endovascular approach had a comparable outcome with SAVR. Conclusions: Primary outcomes after endovascular TAVR were similar to those with SAVR and superior to transapical TAVR treatment group in patients with PCS.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients with a Severe Stenotic Bicuspid Aortic Valve in a Chinese Population.

Xian-bao Liu,Ju-bo Jiang,Qi-jing Zhou,Zhao-xia Pu,Wei He,Ai-qiang Dong,Yan Feng,Jun Jiang,Yong Sun,Mei-xiang Xiang,Yu-xin He,You-qi Fan,Liang Dong,Jian-an Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.b1500017

2015-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with a severe stenotic bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) in a Chinese population. While several groups have reported the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of TAVI for patients with a BAV, worldwide experience of the technique is still limited, especially in China.METHODS:From March 2013 to November 2014, high surgical risk or inoperable patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) who had undergone TAVI at our institution were selected for inclusion in our study. RESULTS were compared between a BAV group and a tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) group.RESULTS:Forty patients were included in this study, 15 (37.5%) of whom were identified as having a BAV. In the BAV group, the aortic valve area was smaller ((0.47±0.13) vs. (0.59±0.14) cm(2)), the ascending aortic diameter was larger ((40.4±4.4) vs. (36.4±4.3) mm), and the concomitant aortic regurgitation was lower. No significant differences were found between the groups in the other baseline characteristics. No differences were observed either in the choice of access or valve size. The procedural success achieved in this study was 100%. There were no differences between groups in device success (86.7% vs. 88.0%), 30-d mortality (6.7% vs. 8.0%), or 30-d combined end point (13.3% vs. 12.0%). The incidences of new pacemaker implantation, paravalvular regurgitation and other complications, recovery of left ventricle ejection fraction and heart function were similar in both groups.CONCLUSIONS:Patients with a severely stenotic BAV can be treated with TAVI, and their condition after treatment should be similar to that of people with a TAV.
An Analysis Regarding the Article: Insight Into the Optimal Timing of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Bhushan Sandeep,Fenglin Jiang,Mingming Wang,Ke Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2023.102107

Abstract:Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an emerging minimally invasive treatment modality that has been shown to reduce mortality significantly compared to medical therapy alone and is superior or noninferior to conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe and symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) deemed to have an intermediate or higher operative risk. AS patients at intermediate surgical risk, although complications of each procedure were different; with vascular complications and paravalvular leak (PVL) being more common in the TAVI group, whereas several other complications were more frequently found in the SAVR group, including new-onset atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury and life-threatening bleeding. The risk factors associated with TAVR include larger annulus size (based on MSCT), pre-TAVI transvalvular Vmax, and aortic valve calcification; aortic valve calcification was found to be an independent predictor of PVL.
Transaxillary Versus Transaortic Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in the Treatment of Aortic Stenosis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ishaque Hameed,Mohammad O Khan,Ibtehaj Ul-Haque,Omer M Siddiqui,Syed A Samad,Shanza Malik,Samar Mahmood

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.24054

2022-04-12

Cureus

Abstract:Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a technique that can be performed through multiple approaches, and the benefits of one approach over another are still being evaluated to make sure patients receive the best possible care. Our meta-analysis aims to compare clinical and procedural outcomes of the transaxillary (TAx) and transaortic (TAo) approaches to validate the more optimal procedure. The systematic literature search was done via PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central databases from inception to December 2021, to identify articles reporting data on both TAx TAVR and TAo TAVR. In addition, we checked ClinicalTrials.gov for more published or unpublished trials. Baseline patient characteristics, procedure results, and clinical results were extracted from the article and pooled for analysis. A quantitative meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.3 (Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). The outcomes extracted included blood transfusion, conversion to sternotomy, tamponade, contrast amount, procedure time, bleeding incidents (minor, major, or life-threatening), length of stay (LOS), vascular complications (minor or major), acute kidney injury (AKI), paravalvular leak (PVL), permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, 30-day mortality, one-year mortality, 30-day stroke, and device success. The final analysis included 11 articles, consisting of 10 observational studies and a pivotal trial. Cumulative results revealed that the TAo approach had a significantly lower incidence of vascular complications (RR = 2.30; 95% CI = 1.22 to 4.35), and the need for implantation of a permanent pacemaker (RR = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.30 to 2.54) along with a lower amount of contrast (mean difference (MD) = 27.40; 95% CI = 3.73 to 51.08) needed to be used. The TAx group was associated with a significantly lower 30-day mortality (RR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.69), AKI (RR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.67), and length of hospital stay (MD = -1.95; 95% CI = -2.51 to -1.38). No significant difference was observed between the outcomes of 30-day stroke (RR = 1.38; 95% CI = 0.81 to 2.33), PVL (RR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.50 to 2.18), tamponade (RR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.12 to 4.03), conversion to sternotomy (RR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.06 to 4.30), device success (RR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.07), the incidence of bleeding (RR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.51 to 1.10), and procedure time (MD = 4.44; 95% CI = -96.30 to 105.17). Both the procedures were associated with their benefits and risks. Although most of the outcomes favored TAx transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), it is too early to say if it would be better than TAo TAVI. To authenticate the findings concluded in this meta-analysis and further improve our understanding of the efficacy, safety, and risk profile between TAx and TAo approaches for TAVI, large sample randomized clinical trials are required on a wide scale.

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

Carla Luzzi,David Orlov,Karen Foley,Eric Horlick,Mark Osten,Robert James Cusimano,George Djaiani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd-23-1739

2024-03-29

Journal of Thoracic Disease

Abstract:Keywords: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI); general anesthesia; conscious sedation; length of stay; costs

respiratory system
Clinical study of anesthesia management and treatment strategies for emergency transcatheter aortic valve replacement

He Wei,Liu Yi,Liu Xianbao,Kong Minjian,Lin Xinping,Ding Minjun,Cheng Jifang,Yan Min

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0282.2022.07.018

2022-01-01

Abstract:Objective:To discuss the essentials of anesthesia management and treatment strategies for emergency transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), and to provide standardized recommendations for the development of emergency TAVR technology in China.Methods:This study retrospectively analyzed the relevant data of patients undergoing emergency TAVR surgery in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine from March 2019 to February 2021, including baseline patient characteristics, perioperative echocardiography data, prognosis and 30-day follow-up. Post-operative data were compared with pre-operative data using paired-sample test.Results:Thirteen patients, aged (75.62±9.63) years, underwent emergency TAVR surgery, and 6 of them were male. Eleven patients were New York Heart Association class Ⅳ. The preoperative Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was (20.31±15.15)%. The trans-aortic valve differential pressure was significantly reduced after surgery [(68.92±30.66)mmHg vs. (2.70±2.36)mmHg, P<0.01]. Two patients died within 30 days after surgery, one patient developed a new third degree atrioventricular block, one patient had a stroke, and 4 patients developed pulmonary infection. Conclusions:Emergency TAVR surgery is a feasible and effective rescue strategy for patients with aortic stenosis in critical condition. The establishment of anesthesia standard operation procedure process for TAVR surgery helps ensure homogenized medical behavior and good teamwork.
Update of Transcatheter Valve Treatment

Xian-bao Liu,Jian-an Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.bqicc702

2013-01-01

Abstract:Transcatheter valve implantation or repair has been a very promising approach for the treatment of valvular heart diseases since transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was successfully performed in 2002. Great achievements have been made in this field (especially TAVI and transcatheter mitral valve repair-MitraClip system) in recent years. Evidence from clinical trials or registry studies has proved that transcatheter valve treatment for valvular heart diseases is safe and effective in surgical high-risk or inoperable patients. As the evidence accumulates, transcatheter valve treatment might be an alterative surgery for younger patients with surgically low or intermediate risk valvular heart diseases in the near future. In this paper, the updates on transcatheter valve treatment are reviewed.
Meta-Analysis Comparing Results of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Patients With <i>Severe</i> Aortic Stenosis

Xinlin Zhang,Tingyu Wang,Rongfang Lan,Qing Dai,Lina Kang,Lian Wang,Yong Wang,Wei Xu,Biao Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.10.057

2020-01-01

Abstract:Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a promising strategy for treating patients with severe aortic stenosis. We aimed to compare TAVR with surgical aortic-valve replacement (SAVR) and determine the performance of TAVR over time and within several subgroups. We included 8 randomized trials comparing TAVR versus SAVR. Compared with SAVR, TAVR was associated with a lower rate of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 30-day (odds ratio [OR], 0.72; p = 0.004), 1-year (OR, 0.83; p = 0.01), and 2-year (OR, 0.86; p = 0.02), but not at long-term follow-up (rate ratio [RR], 1.02 [confidence interval 0.92 to 1.13]; p = 0.67). Notably, 5-year data showed numerically higher incidence in TAVR (RR, 1.11 [confidence interval 0.97 to 1.27]; p = 0.12). The risks associated with TAVR versus SAVR increased over time, showing a significant interaction (p for interaction = 0.01), as were for new-onset atrial fibrillation and rehospitalization. Incidences of major bleeding, new-onset fibrillation, and acute kidney injury were lower in TAVR, whereas transient ischemic attack, major vascular complications, permanent pacemaker implantation, reintervention, and paravalvular leak were lower in SAVR. Incidences for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke were not statistically different. TAVR with transfemoral approach and new-generation valve was associated with reduction in all-cause mortality or disabling stroke compared with corresponding comparators. In conclusion, TAVR was associated with a lower risk for allcause mortality or disabling stroke within 2 years, but not at long-term follow-up compared with SAVR; the risks seems to increase over time. More data are needed to determine longer-term performance of TAVR. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
800.22 Transcatheter vs. Surgical Valve Replacement in Severe Aortic Stenosis with Small Annulus: A Meta-Analytical Review of Two-Year Outcomes

R. Ellauzi,A. Kumar,M. Ismayl,I. Hamza,T. Hamza,N. Anavekar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2024.01.247

IF: 11.075

2024-02-28

JACC Cardiovascular Interventions

Abstract:The optimal approach for severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients with small aortic annulus (SAA) remains uncertain when comparing transcatheter (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
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

Michel Pompeu Sá,Tian Sun,Ali Fatehi Hassanabad,Ahmed K Awad,Jef Van den Eynde,John H Malin,Serge Sicouri,Gianluca Torregrossa,Arjang Ruhparwar,Alexander Weymann,Basel Ramlawi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocs.16511

Abstract:Objectives: To compare outcomes of complete transcatheter (TAVI plus PCI) versus complete surgical (SAVR plus CABG) approach to treat patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: Study-level meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data including studies published by November 2021. The primary endpoints were 30-day mortality, overall survival, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). The secondary endpoints were 30-day stroke, myocardial infarction, and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI); in-hospital major vascular events and acute kidney injury (AKI). Results: Eight studies met our eligibility criteria, including a total of 33,286 patients (3448 for TAVI plus PCI and 29,838 for SAVR plus CABG). The pooled risk of 30-day mortality was lower for TAVI plus PCI (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51-0.80; p < .001). Patients undergoing TAVI plus PCI had lower risk of in-hospital AKI (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.28-0.85; p = .01), however, higher risk of major vascular events (OR 7.33; 95% CI 1.80-29.85; p = .005) and higher risk of PPI (OR 2.96; 95% CI 1.80-4.85; p < .001). No statistically significant difference was observed for myocardial infarction and stroke between the groups. In the follow-up analyses, we observed a higher risk of mortality (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.36-1.96, p < .001) and MACCE with TAVI plus PCI (HR 1.35 (95% CI 1.08-1.69, p = .009). Conclusion: Patients who undergo TAVI plus PCI (in comparison with SAVR plus CABG) initially experience lower rates of in-hospital death and AKI; however, they experience significantly lower survival rates and more MACCE at 5-year follow up. Structural heart surgeons and interventional cardiologists should consider these aspects when referring patients for one approach or the other.
Conscious sedation versus general anesthesia for transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Serkan Aslan,Ahmet Güner,Ali Rıza Demir,Emre Yılmaz,Ayşe Feyza Aslan,Ömer Çelik,Fatih Uzun,Mehmet Ertürk

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02676591211045801

Perfusion

Abstract:Introduction: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is considered a major risk factor for postoperative complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). To date, there is no clear consensus on the best anesthesia management for these patients. We aimed to investigate the effects of types of anesthesia on clinical outcomes in patients with severe COPD undergoing TAVI. Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective study comparing conscious sedation (CS) versus general anesthesia (GA) in 72 patients with severe COPD who underwent TAVI. The primary endpoints were 30-day all-cause mortality and postoperative pulmonary complications. Results: The main outcome of interest of this study was that the frequency of pulmonary complications was statistically higher in the GA group (21.4% vs 3.3%, p = 0.038). These differences are most likely attributed to the GA because of prolonged mechanical ventilation, and longer ICU stay (2 (1.2-3) vs 2.5 (2-4) days, p = 0.029) associated with an increased risk of nosocomial infections. There were no significant differences in procedure complications and 30-day mortality between the two groups (GA; 19% vs CS; 13.3%, p = 0.521). One-year survival rates, compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis, were similar between groups (log-rank p = 0.733). Conclusion: In aortic stenosis patients with severe COPD undergoing TAVI, the use of GA compared with CS was associated with higher incidences of respiratory-related complications, and longer ICU length of stay. CS is a safe and viable option for these patients and should be considered the favored approach.
Transcarotid Versus Trans-Axillary/Subclavian Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Sagun Dawadi,Prakash Raj Oli,Dhan Bahadur Shrestha,Jurgen Shtembari,Kailash Pant,Bishesh Shrestha,Jishanth Mattumpuram,Daniel H Katz,Daniel H. Katz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102488

IF: 16.464

2024-02-01

Current Problems in Cardiology

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) is the treatment of choice in patients with severe aortic stenosis. Transcarotid (TCa) or Trans-axillary/subclavian (TAx/Sc) are safer and less invasive non-femoral approaches, where transfemoral access is difficult or impossible to obtain.METHODS: This meta-analysis was performed based on PRISMA guidelines after registering in PROSPERO (CRD42023482842). This meta-analysis was performed to compare the safety of the transcarotid and trans-axillary/subclavian approach for TAVR including studies from inception to October 2023.RESULTS: Seven studies with a total of 6227 patients were included in the analysis (TCa: 2566; TAx/Sc: 3661). Transcarotid TAVR approach had a favorable trend for composite of stroke and all-cause mortality (OR 0.79, CI 0.60-1.04), all-cause mortality, stroke, major vascular complication, and new requirement of permanent pacemaker though those were statistically insignificant. On sub-analysis of the results of the studies based on the territory (USA vs French), composite outcome of all cause mortality, stroke and major bleeding (OR 0.54, CI 0.54-0.81), composite of stroke and all cause mortality (OR 0.64, CI 0.50-0.81), and stroke/TIA (OR 0.53, CI 0.39-0.73) showed lower odds of occurrence among patient managed with TCa approach in the American cohort.CONCLUSION: Overall, transcarotid approach had favorable though statistically insignificant odds for composite (stroke and all-cause mortality) and individual outcomes (stroke, all-cause mortality, etc.). There are significant variations in observed outcomes based on study's geographic location. Large prospective randomized clinical trials comparing the two approaches with representative samples are necessary to guide the clinicians in choosing among these approaches.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Comparative Analysis of PCI Strategies in Aortic Stenosis Patients Undergoing TAVI: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Parisa Fallahtafti,Hamidreza Soleimani,Pouya Ebrahimi,Amirhossein Ghaseminejad-Raeini,Elaheh Karimi,Amirhossein Shirinezhad,Mahshad Sabri,Mehdi Mehrani,Homa Taheri,Robert Siegel,Neeraj Shah,Michael Nanna,Diaa Hakim,Kaveh Hosseini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.24324

Abstract:Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been increasingly used in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Since coronary artery disease (CAD) is common among these patients, it is crucial to choose the best method and timing of revascularization. This study aims to compare different timing strategies of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI to clarify whether PCI timing affects the patients' outcomes or not. Methods: A frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted comparing three different revascularization strategies in patients with CAD undergoing TAVI. The 30-day all-cause mortality, in-hospital mortality, all-cause mortality at 1 year, 30-day rates of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and major bleeding, and the need for pacemaker implantation at 6 months were analyzed in this study. Results: Our meta-analysis revealed that PCI during TAVI had higher 30-day mortality (RR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.40-4.32) and in-hospital mortality (RR = 1.70, 95% CI = [1.08-2.69]) compared to no PCI. Post-TAVI PCI was associated with higher 1-year mortality compared to other strategies. While no significant differences in major bleeding or stroke were observed, PCI during TAVI versus no PCI (RR = 3.63, 95% CI = 1.27-10.43) showed a higher rate of 30-day MI. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that among patients with severe AS and CAD undergoing TAVI, PCI concomitantly with TAVI seems to be associated with worse 30-day outcomes compared with no PCI. PCI after TAVI demonstrated an increased risk of 1-year mortality compared to alternative strategies. Choosing a timing strategy should be individualized based on patient characteristics and procedural considerations.

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

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

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

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

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Bicuspid Vs. Tricuspid Aortic Stenosis among Patients at Low Surgical Risk in China: from the Multicenter National NTCVR Database

[Value of Preoperative Assessment on Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Procedure with High-Pitch Dual-Source Computed Tomography Angiography].

Percutaneous versus surgical approach to aortic valve replacement with coronary revascularization: A systematic review andmeta-analysis

Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Previous Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients with a Severe Stenotic Bicuspid Aortic Valve in a Chinese Population.

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

Transaxillary Versus Transaortic Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in the Treatment of Aortic Stenosis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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

Clinical study of anesthesia management and treatment strategies for emergency transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Update of Transcatheter Valve Treatment

Meta-Analysis Comparing Results of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Patients With <i>Severe</i> Aortic Stenosis

800.22 Transcatheter vs. Surgical Valve Replacement in Severe Aortic Stenosis with Small Annulus: A Meta-Analytical Review of Two-Year Outcomes

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

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

Transcarotid Versus Trans-Axillary/Subclavian Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Comparative Analysis of PCI Strategies in Aortic Stenosis Patients Undergoing TAVI: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis