Sedation with Ketamine-Propofol in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Comparative Retrospective Study on General Anesthesia.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Nurdan Yilmaz, Yasar Gokhan Gul, Murat Ugurlucan
{"title":"Sedation with Ketamine-Propofol in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Comparative Retrospective Study on General Anesthesia.","authors":"Nurdan Yilmaz, Yasar Gokhan Gul, Murat Ugurlucan","doi":"10.2174/0115701611274790231221044147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is used for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high risk for surgery. Since these patients are elderly and have comorbidities, their management is of great importance.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This retrospective study compares two anesthesia techniques during TAVI: sedation (ketamine and propofol) and general anesthesia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI during 2021 in our hospital were retrospectively screened. Demographic data, comorbidities, anesthesia management, complications, and mortality of the patients were obtained from the records.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 137 patients treated with TAVI; 74 (54%) patients had sedation and 63 (46%) had general anesthesia. When the anesthesia management was evaluated, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the patients who received general anesthesia and sedation. After univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate factors having an impact on mortality, anemia (only in univariate analysis) in the whole study population was a statistically significant risk factor for mortality in patients undergoing TAVI (p<0.014).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was no significant difference in mortality in terms of anesthesia management. Anemia was a risk factor for mortality (only in univariate analysis) in the whole study population. We concluded that conscious sedation with ketamine and propofol is effective and safe for TAVI procedures compared to general anesthesia.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0115701611274790231221044147","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is used for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high risk for surgery. Since these patients are elderly and have comorbidities, their management is of great importance.

Objectives: This retrospective study compares two anesthesia techniques during TAVI: sedation (ketamine and propofol) and general anesthesia.

Methods: Patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI during 2021 in our hospital were retrospectively screened. Demographic data, comorbidities, anesthesia management, complications, and mortality of the patients were obtained from the records.

Results: There were 137 patients treated with TAVI; 74 (54%) patients had sedation and 63 (46%) had general anesthesia. When the anesthesia management was evaluated, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the patients who received general anesthesia and sedation. After univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate factors having an impact on mortality, anemia (only in univariate analysis) in the whole study population was a statistically significant risk factor for mortality in patients undergoing TAVI (p<0.014).

Conclusion: There was no significant difference in mortality in terms of anesthesia management. Anemia was a risk factor for mortality (only in univariate analysis) in the whole study population. We concluded that conscious sedation with ketamine and propofol is effective and safe for TAVI procedures compared to general anesthesia.

在接受经导管主动脉瓣植入术的患者中使用氯胺酮-丙泊酚镇静:与全身麻醉的对比回顾性研究。
背景:经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)用于手术风险较高的重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者。由于这些患者年事已高且有合并症,因此对他们的管理非常重要:这项回顾性研究比较了 TAVI 期间的两种麻醉技术:镇静(氯胺酮和异丙酚)和全身麻醉:回顾性筛选了 2021 年期间在我院接受 TAVI 手术的重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者。从病历中获取患者的人口统计学数据、合并症、麻醉管理、并发症和死亡率:共有137名患者接受了TAVI治疗,其中74人(54%)使用了镇静剂,63人(46%)使用了全身麻醉。对麻醉管理进行评估后发现,接受全身麻醉和镇静的患者死亡率无明显差异。在对影响死亡率的因素进行单变量和多变量逻辑回归分析后发现,在所有研究人群中,贫血(仅在单变量分析中)是导致 TAVI 患者死亡的一个具有统计学意义的风险因素(p 结论:在所有研究人群中,贫血(仅在单变量分析中)是导致 TAVI 患者死亡的一个具有统计学意义的风险因素(p 结论:在所有研究人群中,贫血(仅在单变量分析中)是导致 TAVI 患者死亡的一个具有统计学意义的风险因素:在麻醉管理方面,死亡率没有明显差异。在整个研究人群中,贫血是死亡率的一个风险因素(仅在单变量分析中)。我们的结论是,与全身麻醉相比,使用氯胺酮和异丙酚进行有意识镇静对 TAVI 手术有效且安全。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信