Abuzaid Ahmad, AbdelAal Ibrahim, Galal Ahmed
Cardiac Anesthesia Department, Prince Sultan Cardiac Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Saudi J Anaesth. 2024 Apr-Jun;18(2):197-204. doi: 10.4103/sja.sja_826_23. Epub 2024 Mar 14.
There is an increasing number of patients undergoing transfemoral aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with sedation. There is limited data assessing the efficacy and safety of the different types of sedative drugs. The objective was to compare two sedation techniques with regard to the need for vasoactive support, respiratory support, rate of conversion to general anesthesia (GA), common perioperative morbidities, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and in-hospital mortality.
A retrospective chart review study conducted among patients who underwent TAVR at a specialized cardiac center between January 2016 and December 2019. Data collection included patient diagnosis, preoperative comorbidities, intraoperative outcomes, and postoperative outcomes.
A total of 289 patients received local anesthesia; 210 received propofol infusion and 79 received a mixed propofol-ketamine infusion (Ketofol). The average age was 75.5 ± 8.9 years and 58.1% of the patients were females. Comparing propofol and ketofol groups, 31.2% and 34.2% of the patients required drug support, 7.6% and 6.3% required conversion to GA, 46.7% and 59.5% required respiratory support, respectively. These intraoperative outcomes were not significantly different between groups, = 0.540, = 0.707, and = 0.105, respectively. In-hospital 30-day mortality in propofol and ketofol groups were 1.9% and 3.8%, respectively, = 0.396. In both groups, the median post-procedure coronary care unit stay was 26 hours while post-procedure hospital stay was 3 days.
There were no significant differences in perioperative or postoperative outcomes in TAVR patients receiving either propofol or ketofol. Propofol infusion, either alone or with ketamine, is reliable and safe, with minimal side effects.
接受经股动脉主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)并采用镇静的患者数量日益增多。评估不同类型镇静药物疗效和安全性的数据有限。目的是比较两种镇静技术在血管活性支持需求、呼吸支持需求、转为全身麻醉(GA)的比例、常见围手术期并发症、重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间及院内死亡率方面的差异。
对2016年1月至2019年12月期间在一家专业心脏中心接受TAVR的患者进行回顾性病历审查研究。数据收集包括患者诊断、术前合并症、术中结果及术后结果。
共有289例患者接受局部麻醉;210例接受丙泊酚输注,79例接受丙泊酚 - 氯胺酮混合输注(氯胺酮丙泊酚合剂)。平均年龄为75.5±8.9岁,58.1%的患者为女性。比较丙泊酚组和氯胺酮丙泊酚合剂组,分别有31.2%和34.2%的患者需要药物支持,7.6%和6.3%的患者需要转为GA,46.7%和59.5%的患者需要呼吸支持。这些术中结果在两组之间无显著差异,分别为P = 0.540、P = 0.707和P = 0.105。丙泊酚组和氯胺酮丙泊酚合剂组的院内30天死亡率分别为1.9%和3.8%,P = 0.396。两组术后冠心病监护病房的中位住院时间均为26小时,术后住院时间均为3天。
接受丙泊酚或氯胺酮丙泊酚合剂的TAVR患者在围手术期或术后结果方面无显著差异。丙泊酚输注,单独使用或与氯胺酮联合使用,可靠且安全,副作用极小。