Neel M Butala1, Mabel Chung2, Eric A Secemsky3, Pratik Manandhar4, Guillaume Marquis-Gravel4, Andrzej S Kosinski4, Sreekanth Vemulapalli4, Robert W Yeh3, David J Cohen5. 1. Richard A. and Susan F. Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Cardiology Division, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Richard A. and Susan F. Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Richard A. and Susan F. Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina. 5. University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri. Electronic address: djc795@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to examine variation in the use of conscious sedation (CS) for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) across hospitals and over time and to evaluate outcomes of CS compared with general anesthesia (GA) using instrumental variable analysis, a quasi-experimental method to control for unmeasured confounding. BACKGROUND: Despite increasing use of CS for TAVR, contemporary data on utilization patterns are lacking, and existing studies evaluating the impact of sedation choice on outcomes may suffer from unmeasured confounding. METHODS: Among 120,080 patients in the TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry who underwent transfemoral TAVR between January 2016 and March 2019, the relationship between anesthesia choice and TAVR outcomes was evaluated using hospital proportional use of CS as an instrumental variable. RESULTS: Over the study period, the proportion of TAVR performed using CS increased from 33% to 64%, and CS was used in a median of 0% and 91% of cases in the lowest and highest quartiles of hospital CS use, respectively. On the basis of instrumental variable analysis, CS was associated with decreases in in-hospital mortality (adjusted risk difference: 0.2%; p = 0.010) and 30-day mortality (adjusted risk difference: 0.5%; p < 0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (adjusted difference: 0.8 days; p < 0.001), and more frequent discharge to home (adjusted risk difference: 2.8%; p < 0.001) compared with GA. The magnitude of benefit for most endpoints was less than in a traditional propensity score-based approach, however. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary U.S. practice, the use of CS for TAVR continues to increase, although there remains wide variation across hospitals. The use of CS for TAVR is associated with improved outcomes (including reduced mortality) compared with GA, although the magnitude of benefit appears to be less than in previous studies.
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to examine variation in the use of conscious sedation (CS) for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) across hospitals and over time and to evaluate outcomes of CS compared with general anesthesia (GA) using instrumental variable analysis, a quasi-experimental method to control for unmeasured confounding. BACKGROUND: Despite increasing use of CS for TAVR, contemporary data on utilization patterns are lacking, and existing studies evaluating the impact of sedation choice on outcomes may suffer from unmeasured confounding. METHODS: Among 120,080 patients in the TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry who underwent transfemoral TAVR between January 2016 and March 2019, the relationship between anesthesia choice and TAVR outcomes was evaluated using hospital proportional use of CS as an instrumental variable. RESULTS: Over the study period, the proportion of TAVR performed using CS increased from 33% to 64%, and CS was used in a median of 0% and 91% of cases in the lowest and highest quartiles of hospital CS use, respectively. On the basis of instrumental variable analysis, CS was associated with decreases in in-hospital mortality (adjusted risk difference: 0.2%; p = 0.010) and 30-day mortality (adjusted risk difference: 0.5%; p < 0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (adjusted difference: 0.8 days; p < 0.001), and more frequent discharge to home (adjusted risk difference: 2.8%; p < 0.001) compared with GA. The magnitude of benefit for most endpoints was less than in a traditional propensity score-based approach, however. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary U.S. practice, the use of CS for TAVR continues to increase, although there remains wide variation across hospitals. The use of CS for TAVR is associated with improved outcomes (including reduced mortality) compared with GA, although the magnitude of benefit appears to be less than in previous studies.
Authors: Thérèse A Stukel; Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; David A Alter; Daniel J Gottlieb; Marian J Vermeulen Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-01-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Eric A Secemsky; Enrico G Ferro; Sunil V Rao; Ajay Kirtane; Hector Tamez; Pearl Zakroysky; Daniel Wojdyla; Steven M Bradley; David J Cohen; Robert W Yeh Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Neil J Wimmer; Eric A Secemsky; Laura Mauri; Matthew T Roe; Paramita Saha-Chaudhuri; David Dai; James M McCabe; Frederic S Resnic; Hitinder S Gurm; Robert W Yeh Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 6.546
Authors: John D Carroll; Fred H Edwards; Danica Marinac-Dabic; Ralph G Brindis; Frederick L Grover; Eric D Peterson; E Murat Tuzcu; David M Shahian; John S Rumsfeld; Cynthia M Shewan; Kathleen Hewitt; David R Holmes; Michael J Mack Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Alain Cribier; Helene Eltchaninoff; Assaf Bash; Nicolas Borenstein; Christophe Tron; Fabrice Bauer; Genevieve Derumeaux; Frederic Anselme; François Laborde; Martin B Leon Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-12-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Suzanne J Baron; Kaijun Wang; John A House; Elizabeth A Magnuson; Matthew R Reynolds; Raj Makkar; Howard C Herrmann; Susheel Kodali; Vinod H Thourani; Samir Kapadia; Lars Svensson; Michael J Mack; David L Brown; Mark J Russo; Craig R Smith; John Webb; Craig Miller; Martin B Leon; David J Cohen Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-02-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: David A Wood; Sandra B Lauck; John A Cairns; Karin H Humphries; Richard Cook; Robert Welsh; Jonathon Leipsic; Philippe Genereux; Robert Moss; John Jue; Philipp Blanke; Anson Cheung; Jian Ye; Danny Dvir; Hamed Umedaly; Rael Klein; Kevin Rondi; Rohan Poulter; Dion Stub; Marco Barbanti; Peter Fahmy; Nay Htun; Dale Murdoch; Roshan Prakash; Madeleine Barker; Kevin Nickel; Jay Thakkar; Janarthanan Sathananthan; Ben Tyrell; Faisal Al-Qoofi; James L Velianou; Madhu K Natarajan; Harindra C Wijeysundera; Sam Radhakrishnan; Eric Horlick; Mark Osten; Christopher Buller; Mark Peterson; Anita Asgar; Donald Palisaitis; Jean-Bernard Masson; Susheel Kodali; Tamim Nazif; Vinod Thourani; Vasilis C Babaliaros; David J Cohen; Julie E Park; Martin B Leon; John G Webb Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2019-03-11 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Guilherme F Attizzani; Sandeep M Patel; George D Dangas; Wilson Y Szeto; Paul Sorajja; Michael J Reardon; Jeffrey J Popma; Susheel Kodali; Sharla Chenoweth; Marco A Costa Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Eric A Secemsky; Ajay Kirtane; Sripal Bangalore; Ion S Jovin; Rachit M Shah; Enrico G Ferro; Neil J Wimmer; Matthew Roe; Dadi Dai; Laura Mauri; Robert W Yeh Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Molly Szerlip; Deborah Tabachnick; Mohanad Hamandi; LuAnn Caras; Allison T Lanfear; John J Squiers; Katherine Harrington; Srinivasa P Potluri; J Michael DiMaio; Jordan Wooley; Benjamin Pollock; Justin M Schaffer; William T Brinkman; David L Brown; Michael J Mack Journal: Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) Date: 2020-09-23
Authors: Florence Leclercq; Pierre Alain Meunier; Thomas Gandet; Jean-Christophe Macia; Delphine Delseny; Philippe Gaudard; Marc Mourad; Laurent Schmutz; Pierre Robert; François Roubille; Guillaume Cayla; Mariama Akodad Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-05-16 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Justin K Ugwu; Jideofor K Ndulue; Khaled A Sherif; Samson Alliu; Ayman Elbadawi; Tuncay Taskesen; Doha Hussein; Judith N Ugwu Erugo; Khaled F Chatila; Ahmed Almustafa; Wissam I Khalife; Paul N Kumfa Journal: Cardiol Ther Date: 2022-03-06
Authors: Neel M Butala; Raj Makkar; Eric A Secemsky; Dianne Gallup; Guillaume Marquis-Gravel; Andrzej S Kosinski; Sreekanth Vemulapalli; Javier A Valle; Steven M Bradley; Tarun Chakravarty; Robert W Yeh; David J Cohen Journal: Circulation Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 39.918
Authors: Maxim J P Rooijakkers; Wilson W L Li; Laurens W L M Wollersheim; Guillaume S C Geuzebroek; Helmut Gehlmann; Leen A F M van Garsse; Marleen H van Wely; Michel W A Verkroost; Wim J Morshuis; Heiman Wertheim; Niels van Royen Journal: J Card Surg Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 1.620