BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) requires large-bore vascular access due to the considerable diameters of the endoprosthesis and delivery device. The preclose technique preceding endograft delivery has opened the door for an evolved access strategy. In addition, treatment under local anesthesia offers the advantage of optimal neuromonitoring. The goal of this study was to analyze the efficacy and safety of percutaneous TEVAR under local anesthesia. METHODS: All patients undergoing TEVAR in an elective setting at the Antwerp University Hospital between June 2012 and June 2015 were prospectively entered into an endovascular database. This database was queried for demographics, procedural details, and access-related complications. All patients underwent a percutaneous approach with the Perclose Proglide under local anesthesia. RESULTS: This review identified 34 patients in whom 37 percutaneous TEVAR procedures were completed under local anesthesia. All patients experienced adequate analgesia, and no conversions to general anesthesia were implemented. The mean size of the arteriotomy was 23.8 ± 1.3 French (F). The number of Proglide deployments was 80, with an 8% rate of failure on deployment. There were no conversions to surgical cutdown, and adequate hemostasis was obtained in all procedures. The incidence of postprocedural access-related complications was 3%. CONCLUSION: Local anesthesia for percutaneous TEVAR can be performed safely and effectively. The percutaneous approach facilitates local anesthesia, which provides the added benefit of early recognition of neurologic complications while maintaining a low risk of access-related complications despite the need for large-bore vascular access.
BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) requires large-bore vascular access due to the considerable diameters of the endoprosthesis and delivery device. The preclose technique preceding endograft delivery has opened the door for an evolved access strategy. In addition, treatment under local anesthesia offers the advantage of optimal neuromonitoring. The goal of this study was to analyze the efficacy and safety of percutaneous TEVAR under local anesthesia. METHODS: All patients undergoing TEVAR in an elective setting at the Antwerp University Hospital between June 2012 and June 2015 were prospectively entered into an endovascular database. This database was queried for demographics, procedural details, and access-related complications. All patients underwent a percutaneous approach with the Perclose Proglide under local anesthesia. RESULTS: This review identified 34 patients in whom 37 percutaneous TEVAR procedures were completed under local anesthesia. All patients experienced adequate analgesia, and no conversions to general anesthesia were implemented. The mean size of the arteriotomy was 23.8 ± 1.3 French (F). The number of Proglide deployments was 80, with an 8% rate of failure on deployment. There were no conversions to surgical cutdown, and adequate hemostasis was obtained in all procedures. The incidence of postprocedural access-related complications was 3%. CONCLUSION: Local anesthesia for percutaneous TEVAR can be performed safely and effectively. The percutaneous approach facilitates local anesthesia, which provides the added benefit of early recognition of neurologic complications while maintaining a low risk of access-related complications despite the need for large-bore vascular access.
Entities:
Keywords:
Local anesthesia; Percutaneous; Thoracic endovascular aortic repair
Authors: Elliot L Chaikof; Jan D Blankensteijn; Peter L Harris; Geoffrey H White; Christopher K Zarins; Victor M Bernhard; Jon S Matsumura; James May; Frank J Veith; Mark F Fillinger; Robert B Rutherford; K Craig Kent Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Rodney P Bensley; Rob Hurks; Zhen Huang; Frank Pomposelli; Allen Hamdan; Mark Wyers; Elliot Chaikof; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2012-02-22 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Jesse M Manunga; Peter Gloviczki; Gustavo S Oderich; Manju Kalra; Audra A Duncan; Mark D Fleming; Thomas C Bower Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2013-07-02 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Vahid Etezadi; Barry T Katzen; Amer Naiem; Amardeep Johar; Scott Wong; Joseph Fuller; James F Benenati Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2010-12-30 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Albeir Y Mousa; John E Campbell; Mike Broce; Shadi Abu-Halimah; Patrick A Stone; Stephen M Hass; Ali F AbuRahma; Mark Bates Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2013-06-28 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Zachary M Arthurs; Benjamin W Starnes; Vance Y Sohn; Niten Singh; Charles A Andersen Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2008-07-26 Impact factor: 1.466