Clinical Department of Anaesthesiology and Perioperative Intensive Care, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Clinical Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia; University of Ljubljana Faculty of Medicine, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2023 Oct;37(10):1894-1900. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2023.05.009. Epub 2023 May 6.
Although procedural sedation is an established method of anesthesia for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), reliable evidence to guide the choice of a suitable sedative agent remains scarce. Accordingly, this trial aimed to compare the effect of procedural sedation with dexmedetomidine versus propofol on postoperative neurocognitive and related clinical outcomes in patients undergoing TAVR.
Prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial.
The study was conducted at the University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Slovenia.
The study enrolled 78 patients who underwent TAVR under procedural sedation between January 2019 and June 2021. Seventy-one patients randomized into the propofol group (n = 34) and dexmedetomidine group (n = 37) were included in the final analysis.
Patients in the propofol group received sedation with propofol (continuous intravenous infusion of 0.5-2.5 mg/kg/h), whereas patients in the dexmedetomidine group received sedation with dexmedetomidine (loading dose of 0.5 µg/kg over 10 minutes followed by continuous intravenous infusion of 0.2-1.0 µg/kg/h).
Minimental state examination (MMSE) was performed before and 48 hours after TAVR. There was no statistically significant difference in MMSE scores between groups before TAVR (p = 0.253), but the MMSE after the procedure revealed a significantly lower incidence of delayed neurocognitive recovery (p = 0.005) and thus better cognitive outcomes in the dexmedetomidine group (p = 0.022).
Compared with propofol, procedural sedation with dexmedetomidine in TAVR was associated with a significantly lower incidence of delayed neurocognitive recovery.
虽然在经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)中,程序性镇静是一种既定的麻醉方法,但仍缺乏可靠的证据来指导合适镇静剂的选择。因此,本试验旨在比较右美托咪定与丙泊酚用于 TAVR 患者的程序性镇静对术后神经认知和相关临床结局的影响。
前瞻性、随机、双盲临床试验。
该研究在斯洛文尼亚卢布尔雅那大学医学中心进行。
该研究纳入了 2019 年 1 月至 2021 年 6 月期间接受 TAVR 下程序性镇静的 78 名患者。71 名随机分为丙泊酚组(n=34)和右美托咪定组(n=37)的患者被纳入最终分析。
丙泊酚组患者接受丙泊酚镇静(持续静脉输注 0.5-2.5mg/kg/h),而右美托咪定组患者接受右美托咪定镇静(负荷剂量 0.5μg/kg 静脉输注 10 分钟,然后持续静脉输注 0.2-1.0μg/kg/h)。
术前和 TAVR 后 48 小时进行简易精神状态检查(MMSE)。术前两组 MMSE 评分无统计学差异(p=0.253),但术后 MMSE 显示右美托咪定组迟发性神经认知恢复发生率显著降低(p=0.005),认知结局更好(p=0.022)。
与丙泊酚相比,TAVR 中右美托咪定程序性镇静与迟发性神经认知恢复发生率显著降低相关。