Patient Selection and Outcomes of Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Performed with Monitored Anesthesia Care Versus General Anesthesia

Objective: The aini of this study was to compare outcomes of monitored anesthesia care (MAC) versus general anesthesia (GA) for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) and to describe a selection process for the administration of MAC. Design: Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent TF-TAVR under MAC or GA. Setting: Department of Cardiac Anesthesia. Albany Medical Center. a tertiary university hospital. Participants: Patients selected for TF-TAVR. Interventions: Patients were divided into those who underwent MAC and those who underwent GA. Measurements and Main Results: The study comprised 104 consecutive patients (55% male, mean age 83 years) who underwent TF-TAVR under MAC (n = 60) or GA (n = 37) from 2014 to 2015. Seven patients were converted from MAC to GA and were omitted from analysis. There was no statistically significant difference between 30-day mortality and complications between the 2 groups. The MAC group had a significantly shorter median intensive care unit length of stay (48 h v 74 h, p = 0.0002). The MAC group also demonstrated reduced procedural time (45.5 min v 62 min, p = 0.003): operating room time (111 min v 153 min, p = < 0.001): and fluoroscopy time (650 s v 690 s, p = 0.03). Conclusions: Patient selection for TF-TAVR with MAC can he formalized and implemented successfully. MAC allows for the minimizing of patient exposure to unnecessary interventions and improving resource utilization in suitable TAVR patients. Selection requires a multidisciplinary clinical decision-making process. MAC demonstrates good outcomes compared with GA, yet it is important to have a cardiac anesthesiologist present in the event of emergency conversion to GA. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.