Display options
Cite
Møller Nielsen I, Andersen C. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high risk patients with different anaesthetic techniques. HSR Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth. 2010;2(4):273-7
Møller Nielsen, I., & Andersen, C. (2010). Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high risk patients with different anaesthetic techniques. HSR proceedings in intensive care & cardiovascular anesthesia, 2(4), 273-7.
Møller Nielsen, I, and Andersen, C. "Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high risk patients with different anaesthetic techniques." HSR proceedings in intensive care & cardiovascular anesthesia vol. 2,4 (2010): 273-7.
Møller Nielsen I, Andersen C. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high risk patients with different anaesthetic techniques. HSR Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth. 2010;2(4):273-7. PMID: 23439576; PMCID: PMC3484594.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

HSR Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth. 2010;2(4):273-7.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high risk patients with different anaesthetic techniques.

HSR proceedings in intensive care & cardiovascular anesthesia

I Møller Nielsen, C Andersen

Affiliations

  1. Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.

PMID: 23439576 PMCID: PMC3484594

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous retrograde transfemoral or transsubclavian aortic valve replacement is a minimally invasive method of aortic valve replacement in elderly and high-risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis considered too fragile to go through conventional heart surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare two different anaesthetic techniques for percutaneous retrograde transfemoral or transsubclavian aortic valve replacement in terms of anaesthetic depth, hemodynamic stability and need for vasoactive drugs.

METHODS: Forty-eight elderly or high risk patients, two third of them in their eighties, were scheduled for percutaneous retrograde transfemoral or transsubclavian aortic valve replacement. Anaesthetic induction was standardized, but anaesthesia was afterwards maintained alternately with either propofol infusion or sevoflurane. Need for vasoactive drugs was recorded and anaesthetic depth was estimated from acoustic evoked potential measuring and clinical observation.

RESULTS: Twenty-eight percent of the patients in the sevoflurane group and 30% of the patients in the propofol group required vasoactive therapy (P=0.84). Forty-four percent of the patients in the sevoflurane group and 57% of the patients in the propofol group had episodes of superficial anaesthesia recorded(P=0.38).

CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant difference in the use of vasoactive drugs or in anaesthetic depth between propofol and sevoflurane anaesthesia. Both can be recommended for percutaneous aortic valve replacement.

Keywords: AVR; PAVR; anaesthesia; trans catheter

References

  1. Minerva Anestesiol. 2010 Feb;76(2):100-8 - PubMed
  2. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2009 Jun;23(3):280-5 - PubMed
  3. Eur Heart J. 1992 May;13(5):704-8 - PubMed
  4. Eur Heart J. 2003 Jul;24(13):1231-43 - PubMed
  5. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 Mar 21;47(6):1214-23 - PubMed
  6. Echocardiography. 2008 Sep;25(8):840-8 - PubMed
  7. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004 Feb 18;43(4):698-703 - PubMed
  8. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009 Jan;137(1):82-90 - PubMed
  9. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006 Aug;68(2):199-204 - PubMed
  10. Circulation. 2002 Dec 10;106(24):3006-8 - PubMed
  11. Circulation. 2006 Feb 14;113(6):842-50 - PubMed
  12. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 Jul 3;50(1):69-76 - PubMed

Publication Types