General Anesthesia or Monitored Anesthesia Care for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Current Trends and Future Directions

General Anesthesia or Monitored Anesthesia Care for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve... Purpose of Review The purpose of this chapter is to provide a brief review on current anesthesia techniques for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI). Recent Findings TF-TAVI has become a standard treatment option for high risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. Increasing experience with prosthetic durability and equivalent or superior outcomes of transcatheter over surgical aortic valve replacement will boost the caseload of high- and intermediate-risk patients. For TF-TAVI, general anesthesia (GA) had initially been widely preferred over local anesthesia with monitored anesthesia care (LA-MAC), but with large national practice variation. Institutional routines are changing now since evidence from large registries accrues that LA-MAC represents a feasible, safe, and economically sound alternative to GA, if no contraindications apply. Although prospective randomized TAVI anesthesia trials are lacking, observational data show that GA is associated with higher patient risk, longer procedural time, more vasopressor and transfusion requirement, and more resource use and costs, whereas periprocedural mortality is comparable or non-significantly better with LA-MAC. In summary, GA remains a robust solution for specific situations and teams. In many experienced centers, however, LA-MAC has become first choice whenever possible. Whether LA-MAC is an option should be decided upon by the anesthesiologist and the heart team in consultation with the patient, following prospectively defined decision pathways. With increasing caseload and decreasing invasiveness of TAVI technology, anesthesia providers must meet the challenge to reduce resource use and costs without compromising patient safety and satisfaction. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Current Anesthesiology Reports Springer Journals

General Anesthesia or Monitored Anesthesia Care for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Current Trends and Future Directions

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/general-anesthesia-or-monitored-anesthesia-care-for-transfemoral-E08K60hNP8
Publisher
Springer US
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 by Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Anesthesiology
eISSN
2167-6275
D.O.I.
10.1007/s40140-017-0225-6
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose of Review The purpose of this chapter is to provide a brief review on current anesthesia techniques for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI). Recent Findings TF-TAVI has become a standard treatment option for high risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. Increasing experience with prosthetic durability and equivalent or superior outcomes of transcatheter over surgical aortic valve replacement will boost the caseload of high- and intermediate-risk patients. For TF-TAVI, general anesthesia (GA) had initially been widely preferred over local anesthesia with monitored anesthesia care (LA-MAC), but with large national practice variation. Institutional routines are changing now since evidence from large registries accrues that LA-MAC represents a feasible, safe, and economically sound alternative to GA, if no contraindications apply. Although prospective randomized TAVI anesthesia trials are lacking, observational data show that GA is associated with higher patient risk, longer procedural time, more vasopressor and transfusion requirement, and more resource use and costs, whereas periprocedural mortality is comparable or non-significantly better with LA-MAC. In summary, GA remains a robust solution for specific situations and teams. In many experienced centers, however, LA-MAC has become first choice whenever possible. Whether LA-MAC is an option should be decided upon by the anesthesiologist and the heart team in consultation with the patient, following prospectively defined decision pathways. With increasing caseload and decreasing invasiveness of TAVI technology, anesthesia providers must meet the challenge to reduce resource use and costs without compromising patient safety and satisfaction.

Journal

Current Anesthesiology ReportsSpringer Journals

Published: Jul 28, 2017

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off