Cargando…

Is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the potential favourable effects of local anaesthesia plus sedation (LAS) compared with general anaesthesia (GA) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: Electronic databases (PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ehret, Constanze, Rossaint, Rolf, Foldenauer, Ann Christina, Stoppe, Christian, Stevanovic, Ana, Dohms, Katharina, Hein, Marc, Schälte, Gereon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5623571/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28951409
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016321
_version_ 1783268119475650560
author Ehret, Constanze
Rossaint, Rolf
Foldenauer, Ann Christina
Stoppe, Christian
Stevanovic, Ana
Dohms, Katharina
Hein, Marc
Schälte, Gereon
author_facet Ehret, Constanze
Rossaint, Rolf
Foldenauer, Ann Christina
Stoppe, Christian
Stevanovic, Ana
Dohms, Katharina
Hein, Marc
Schälte, Gereon
author_sort Ehret, Constanze
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the potential favourable effects of local anaesthesia plus sedation (LAS) compared with general anaesthesia (GA) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: Electronic databases (PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and the reference lists of eligible publications were screened for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies published between 1 January 2006 and 26 June 2016 that compare LAS to GA in an adult study population undergoing TAVI. We conducted study quality assessments using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and structured the review according to PRISMA. A meta-analysis calculating the pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) under the assumption of a random-effects model was performed. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated using the I² statistic and Cochran’s Q-test. RESULTS: After database screening, one RCT and 19 observational studies were included in the review. We found no differences between LAS and GA in terms of 30-day mortality, in-hospital mortality and other endpoints that addressed safety and complication rates. LAS was associated with a shorter ICU and hospital stay and with lower rates of catecholamine administration and red blood cell transfusion. New pacemaker implantations occurred more frequently under LAS. The overall conversion rate from LAS to GA was 6.2%. CONCLUSION: For TAVI, both LAS and GA are feasible and safe. LAS may have some benefits such as increased haemodynamic stability and shorter hospital and ICU stays, but it does not impact 30-day mortality. Since there is a paucity of randomised trial data and the findings are mainly based on observational study data, this review should be considered as a hypothesis-generating article for subsequent RCTs that are required to confirm the potential favourable effects we detected for LAS. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016048398 (PROSPERO).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5623571
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56235712017-10-10 Is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia Ehret, Constanze Rossaint, Rolf Foldenauer, Ann Christina Stoppe, Christian Stevanovic, Ana Dohms, Katharina Hein, Marc Schälte, Gereon BMJ Open Anaesthesia OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the potential favourable effects of local anaesthesia plus sedation (LAS) compared with general anaesthesia (GA) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: Electronic databases (PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and the reference lists of eligible publications were screened for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies published between 1 January 2006 and 26 June 2016 that compare LAS to GA in an adult study population undergoing TAVI. We conducted study quality assessments using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and structured the review according to PRISMA. A meta-analysis calculating the pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) under the assumption of a random-effects model was performed. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated using the I² statistic and Cochran’s Q-test. RESULTS: After database screening, one RCT and 19 observational studies were included in the review. We found no differences between LAS and GA in terms of 30-day mortality, in-hospital mortality and other endpoints that addressed safety and complication rates. LAS was associated with a shorter ICU and hospital stay and with lower rates of catecholamine administration and red blood cell transfusion. New pacemaker implantations occurred more frequently under LAS. The overall conversion rate from LAS to GA was 6.2%. CONCLUSION: For TAVI, both LAS and GA are feasible and safe. LAS may have some benefits such as increased haemodynamic stability and shorter hospital and ICU stays, but it does not impact 30-day mortality. Since there is a paucity of randomised trial data and the findings are mainly based on observational study data, this review should be considered as a hypothesis-generating article for subsequent RCTs that are required to confirm the potential favourable effects we detected for LAS. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016048398 (PROSPERO). BMJ Publishing Group 2017-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5623571/ /pubmed/28951409 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016321 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Anaesthesia
Ehret, Constanze
Rossaint, Rolf
Foldenauer, Ann Christina
Stoppe, Christian
Stevanovic, Ana
Dohms, Katharina
Hein, Marc
Schälte, Gereon
Is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia
title Is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia
title_full Is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia
title_fullStr Is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia
title_full_unstemmed Is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia
title_short Is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia
title_sort is local anaesthesia a favourable approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation? a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing local and general anaesthesia
topic Anaesthesia
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5623571/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28951409
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016321
work_keys_str_mv AT ehretconstanze islocalanaesthesiaafavourableapproachfortranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiscomparinglocalandgeneralanaesthesia
AT rossaintrolf islocalanaesthesiaafavourableapproachfortranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiscomparinglocalandgeneralanaesthesia
AT foldenauerannchristina islocalanaesthesiaafavourableapproachfortranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiscomparinglocalandgeneralanaesthesia
AT stoppechristian islocalanaesthesiaafavourableapproachfortranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiscomparinglocalandgeneralanaesthesia
AT stevanovicana islocalanaesthesiaafavourableapproachfortranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiscomparinglocalandgeneralanaesthesia
AT dohmskatharina islocalanaesthesiaafavourableapproachfortranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiscomparinglocalandgeneralanaesthesia
AT heinmarc islocalanaesthesiaafavourableapproachfortranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiscomparinglocalandgeneralanaesthesia
AT schaltegereon islocalanaesthesiaafavourableapproachfortranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysiscomparinglocalandgeneralanaesthesia