Dataset Information

Conscious Sedation Versus General Anesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Variation in Practice and Outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The aims of this study were to examine variation in the use of conscious sedation (CS) for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) across hospitals and over time and to evaluate outcomes of CS compared with general anesthesia (GA) using instrumental variable analysis, a quasi-experimental method to control for unmeasured confounding.

Background

Despite increasing use of CS for TAVR, contemporary data on utilization patterns are lacking, and existing studies evaluating the impact of sedation choice on outcomes may suffer from unmeasured confounding.

Methods

Among 120,080 patients in the TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry who underwent transfemoral TAVR between January 2016 and March 2019, the relationship between anesthesia choice and TAVR outcomes was evaluated using hospital proportional use of CS as an instrumental variable.

Results

Over the study period, the proportion of TAVR performed using CS increased from 33% to 64%, and CS was used in a median of 0% and 91% of cases in the lowest and highest quartiles of hospital CS use, respectively. On the basis of instrumental variable analysis, CS was associated with decreases in in-hospital mortality (adjusted risk difference: 0.2%; p = 0.010) and 30-day mortality (adjusted risk difference: 0.5%; p < 0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (adjusted difference: 0.8 days; p < 0.001), and more frequent discharge to home (adjusted risk difference: 2.8%; p < 0.001) compared with GA. The magnitude of benefit for most endpoints was less than in a traditional propensity score-based approach, however.

Conclusions

In contemporary U.S. practice, the use of CS for TAVR continues to increase, although there remains wide variation across hospitals. The use of CS for TAVR is associated with improved outcomes (including reduced mortality) compared with GA, although the magnitude of benefit appears to be less than in previous studies.

SUBMITTER: Butala NM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7650030 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Conscious Sedation Versus General Anesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Variation in Practice and Outcomes.

Butala Neel M NM Chung Mabel M Secemsky Eric A EA Manandhar Pratik P Marquis-Gravel Guillaume G Kosinski Andrzej S AS Vemulapalli Sreekanth S Yeh Robert W RW Cohen David J DJ

JACC. Cardiovascular interventions 20200601 11

<h4>Objectives</h4>The aims of this study were to examine variation in the use of conscious sedation (CS) for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) across hospitals and over time and to evaluate outcomes of CS compared with general anesthesia (GA) using instrumental variable analysis, a quasi-experimental method to control for unmeasured confounding.<h4>Background</h4>Despite increasing use of CS for TAVR, contemporary data on utilization patterns are lacking, and existing studies evalua ...[more]

PMID: 32499018

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo compare the merits and safety between conscious sedation/monitored anesthesia (CS/MAC) and general anesthesia (GA) for patients receiving transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).MeasurementsDatabases including EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to October 2022 to identify studies investigating the impact of CS/MAC on peri-procedural and prognostic outcomes compared to those with GA. The primary outcome was the association of CS/MAC with the risk of 30-day mortality, while secondary outcomes included the risks of adverse peri-procedural (e.g., vasopressor/inotropic support) and post-procedural (e.g., stroke) outcomes. Subgroup analysis was performed based on study design [i.e., cohort vs. matched cohort/randomized controlled trials (RCTs)].Main resultsTwenty-four studies (observational studies, n = 22; RCTs, n = 2) involving 141,965 patients were analyzed. Pooled results revealed lower risks of 30-day mortality [odd ratios (OR) = 0.66, p < 0.00001, 139,731 patients, certainty of evidence (COE): low], one-year mortality (OR = 0.72, p = 0.001, 4,827 patients, COE: very low), major bleeding (OR = 0.61, p = 0.01, 6,888 patients, COE: very low), acute kidney injury (OR = 0.71, p = 0.01, 7,155 patients, COE: very low), vasopressor/inotropic support (OR = 0.25, p < 0.00001, 133,438 patients, COE: very low), shorter procedure time (MD = -12.27 minutes, p = 0.0006, 17,694 patients, COE: very low), intensive care unit stay (mean difference(MD) = -7.53 h p = 0.04, 7,589 patients, COE: very low), and hospital stay [MD = -0.84 days, p < 0.00001, 19,019 patients, COE: very low) in patients receiving CS/MAC compared to those undergoing GA without significant differences in procedure success rate, risks of cardiac-vascular complications (e.g., myocardial infarction) and stroke. The pooled conversion rate was 3.1%. Results from matched cohort/RCTs suggested an association of CS/MAC use with a shorter procedural time and hospital stay, and a lower risk of vasopressor/inotropic support.ConclusionCompared with GA, our results demonstrated that the use of CS/MAC may be feasible and safe in patients receiving TAVR. However, more evidence is needed to support our findings because of our inclusion of mostly retrospective studies.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022367417.

Dataset Information

Conscious Sedation Versus General Anesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Variation in Practice and Outcomes.

Objectives

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Conscious Sedation Versus General Anesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Variation in Practice and Outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets