Department of Cardiology and Angiology I, Faculty of Medicine, Heart Centre Freiburg University, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, University Hospital Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
PLoS One. 2020 Feb 5;15(2):e0227345. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227345. eCollection 2020.
Patients with postoperative delirium (POD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are ventilated and hospitalized longer and suffer increased in-hospital mortality. This study hypothesized that a minimalistic approach with conscious sedation during transfemoral aortic valve replacement (TF-AVR) protects against delirium, time of mechanical ventilation, and increased length of stay in intensive care unit (ICU) compared to intubation anaesthesia.
308 patients which underwent TF-AVR in our centre between 01/2013 and 08/2017 were retrospectively evaluated regarding postoperative delirium, time of mechanical ventilation, and days in ICU. TF-AVR was performed with intubation anaesthesia in 245 patients and with conscious sedation in 63. The operative risk estimated by the logEUROScore was similar in both groups (intubation: 13.28 +/-9.06%, conscious sedation: 12.24 +/-6.77%, p = 0.395). In the conscious sedation group procedure duration was shorter (0.61 +/-0.91h vs. 1.75 +/-0.96h, p<0.001). The risk for intraprocedural complications was not influenced by the anaesthesia method (OR conscious sedation instead of intubation 1.66, p = 0.117), but days on ICU (-2.21 days, p<0.0001) and minutes of mechanical ventilation (-531.2 min, p < 0.0001) were reduced. Furthermore, the risk of POD was decreased when TF-AVR was performed under conscious sedation (6.35% vs. 18.18%, OR 0.29, p = 0.021).
Time of mechanical ventilation, risk of POD, and days on ICU were substantially reduced in patients who underwent TF-AVR under conscious sedation. Our data suggest that TF-AVR with conscious sedation is safe with a beneficial postoperative course in clinical practice, and should be considered the favoured approach.
经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)后发生术后谵妄(POD)的患者需要更长时间的机械通气和住院治疗,并且院内死亡率增加。本研究假设,与插管麻醉相比,经股主动脉瓣置换术(TF-AVR)期间采用最低限度的镇静方法可以预防谵妄、机械通气时间和重症监护病房(ICU)入住时间的延长。
对 2013 年 1 月至 2017 年 8 月期间在我们中心接受 TF-AVR 的 308 例患者进行了回顾性评估,以评估术后谵妄、机械通气时间和 ICU 入住天数。245 例患者采用插管麻醉进行 TF-AVR,63 例患者采用清醒镇静。两组患者的手术风险(通过 logEUROScore 估计)相似(插管:13.28 +/-9.06%,清醒镇静:12.24 +/-6.77%,p = 0.395)。在清醒镇静组中,手术时间更短(0.61 +/-0.91 小时 vs. 1.75 +/-0.96 小时,p<0.001)。麻醉方法并不影响术中并发症的风险(清醒镇静替代插管的 OR 为 1.66,p = 0.117),但 ICU 入住天数(-2.21 天,p<0.0001)和机械通气时间(-531.2 分钟,p < 0.0001)减少。此外,在清醒镇静下进行 TF-AVR 可降低 POD 的风险(6.35% vs. 18.18%,OR 0.29,p = 0.021)。
在接受清醒镇静下 TF-AVR 的患者中,机械通气时间、POD 风险和 ICU 入住天数显著减少。我们的数据表明,在临床实践中,TF-AVR 联合清醒镇静是安全的,且术后转归有益,应考虑作为首选方法。