Monitored Anesthesia Care Versus General Anesthesia: Experience with the Medtronic CoreValve

Christopher Palermo, Meredith Degnan, Keith A Candiotti, Tomas Salerno, Eduardo De Marchena, Yiliam Rodriguez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: To compare monitored anesthesia care (MAC) and general anesthesia (GA) for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Design: Retrospective, case-control study. Setting: A large university-affiliated hospital system. Participants: The study comprised patients who underwent TAVI with the Medtronic CoreValve (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) between 2011 and 2015. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: MAC (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. Conclusions: GA provides no significant advantages over MAC during TAVI.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2016

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • CoreValve
  • delirium
  • propofol
  • transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this