• Christopher Palermo, Meredith Degnan, Keith Candiotti, Tomas Salerno, Eduardo de Marchena, and Yiliam Rodriguez-Blanco.
• University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL. Electronic address: Cpalermo@med.miami.edu.
• J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 2016 Oct 1; 30 (5): 1234-7.

ObjectiveTo compare monitored anesthesia care (MAC) and general anesthesia (GA) for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).DesignRetrospective, case-control study.SettingA large university-affiliated hospital system.ParticipantsThe study comprised patients who underwent TAVI with the Medtronic CoreValve (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) between 2011 and 2015.InterventionsNone.Measurements And Main ResultsMAC (n = 44) and GA (n = 21) were compared in 65 patients who underwent TAVI. Baseline characteristics/demographics, hospital stay, intraoperative conditions, and intensive care unit (ICU)/hospital stays were compared using the chi-square test, unpaired t-test, or binomial regression where appropriate. There were no significant differences between patient populations with regard to 30-day mortality, ICU/hospital stay, and complication rates. The GA group used more blood product. The rate of ICU readmission was greater in the GA group but did not reach statistical significance.ConclusionsGA provides no significant advantages over MAC during TAVI.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

37 keywords...

hide…