Advertisement

Case series: anesthesia for retrograde percutaneous aortic valve replacement — experience with the first 40 patients

  • Ronald M. Ree
  • John B. Bowering
  • Stephan K. W. Schwarz
Case Reports/Case Series

Abstract

Purpose: To describe both the evolution and the main associated complications in the anesthetic management of the initial 40 patients at our centre who underwent percutaneous retrograde aortic valve replacement, a novel technique utilizing a catheterguided femoral artery approach.

Clinical features: With institutional Research Ethics Board approval, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of the first 40 patients who underwent percutaneous retrograde aortic valve replacement between January 2005 and March 2006. Information obtained included patient characteristics, anesthetic management, details of the procedure, and complications. All procedures were scheduled to be performed in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. The first four patients received monitored anesthesia care, and the subsequent 36 underwent general anesthesia. There were no anesthesia-related adverse events. The prosthetic valve was placed successfully in 33/40 patients (83%). Median anesthetic time was 3.5 hr (range, 1.25–7.25 hr). Thirty-two/40 patients required vasopressor support. The most common, serious procedural complications were myocardial ischemia and arrhythmia following rapid ventricular pacing, hemorrhage from vascular injury secondary to the placement and removal of the large-bore sheath in the ilio-femoral artery, aortic rupture, and prosthetic valve maldeployment; 30-day mortality was 13% (n=5/40).

Conclusions: Percutaneous retrograde aortic valve replacement is a novel procedure that presents the anesthesiologist with unique challenges. Careful preoperative assessment, intraoperative monitoring appropriate for a major vascular procedure, and meticulous management of hemodynamics are imperative for a successful outcome. Serious complications, including major hemorrhage from vascular injury as well as arrhythmia and myocardial ischemia following rapid ventricular pacing, must be anticipated and managed in an expeditious fashion.

Keywords

Aortic Stenosis Aortic Valve Replacement Prosthetic Valve Aortic Valve Area Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Présentation de cas : L’anesthésie pour un remplacement valvulaire aortique percutané rétrograde : notre expérience avec les 40 premiers patients

Résumé

Objectif: Décrire l’évolution et les principales complications associées à la prise en charge anesthésique des premiers 40 patients de notre centre à subir un remplacement valvulaire aortique percutané rétrograde, une technique innovante utilisant une approche échoguidée par l’artère fémorale.

Éléments cliniques: Une fois le consentement du Comité d’éthique de la recherche obtenu, nous avons révisé de façon rétrospective les dossiers médicaux des 40 premiers patients à avoir subi un remplacement valvulaire aortique percutané rétrograde entre janvier 2005 et mars 2006. Les caractéristiques des patients, la prise en charge anesthésique, les détails de l’intervention et les complications faisaient partie des renseignements obtenus. Toutes les interventions étaient prévues dans le laboratoire de cathétérisation cardiaque. Les quatre premiers patients ont reçu une sédation sous surveillance, et les 36 suivants une anesthésie générale. Il n’y a pas eu d’événements indésirables provoqués par l’anesthésie. La prothèse valvulaire a été positionnée avec succès chez 33/40 patients (83 %). Le temps d’anesthésie médian était de 3,5 h (extrêmes, 1,25 – 7, 25 h). Un vasopresseur a été nécessaire chez 32/40 patients. Suite à l’intervention, les complications graves les plus fréquentes étaient l’ischémie myocardique et l’arythmie à la suite d’un entraînement ventriculaire rapide, l’hémorragie provoquée par une lésion vasculaire due au positionnement et au retrait de la gaine à grand diamètre dans l’artère ilio-fémorale, la rupture aortique et le mauvais déploiement de la prothèse valvulaire. La mortalité à 30 jours était de 13 % (5/40).

Conclusion: Le remplacement valvulaire aortique percutané rétrograde est une intervention nouvelle qui présente à l’anesthésiologiste des défis spéciaux. Une évaluation préopératoire attentive, un monitorage peropératoire adapté à une intervention vasculaire majeure et une prise en charge méticuleuse de l’hémodynamie sont absolument nécessaires à un devenir réussi. Des complications graves, notamment une hémorragie majeure causée par une lésion vasculaire ainsi que de l’arythmie et une ischémie myocardique suite à un entraînement ventriculaire rapide doivent être anticipés et pris en charge rapidement.

References

  1. 1e.
    Lester SJ, Heilbron B, Gin K, Dodek, Jue J. The natural history and rate of progression of aortic stenosis. Chest 1998; 113: 1109–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bonow RO, Carabello B, de Leon ACJr, et al. Guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease). Circulation 1998; 98: 1949–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bouma BJ, van Den Brink RB, van Der Meulen JH, et al. To operate or not on elderly patients with aortic stenosis: the decision and its consequences. Heart 1999; 82: 143–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bloomstein LZ, Gielchinsky I, Berstein AD, et al. Aortic valve replacement in geriatric patients: determinants of in-hospital mortality. Ann Thorac Surg 2001; 71: 597–600.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Otto CM, Mickel MC, Kennedy JW, et al. Three-year outcome after balloon aortic valvuloplasty: insights into prognosis of valvular aortic stenosis. Circulation 1994; 89: 642–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lieberman EB, Bashore TM, Hermiller JB, et al. Balloon aortic valvuloplasty in adults: failure of procedure to improve long-term survival. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 26: 1522–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andersen HR, Knudsen LL, Hasenkam JM. Transluminal implantation of artificial heart valves. Description of a new expandable aortic valve and initial results with implantation by catheter technique in closed chest pigs. Eur Heart J 1992; 13: 704–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Bash A, et al. Percutaneous transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis for calcific aortic stenosis: first human case description. Circulation 2002; 106: 3006–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Tron C, et al. Early experience with percutaneous transcatheter implantation of heart valve prosthesis for the treatment of end-stage inoperable patients with calcific aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 43: 698–703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Tron C, et al. Treatment of calcific aortic stenosis with the percutaneous heart valve: mid-term follow-up from the initial feasibility studies: the French experience. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 47: 1214–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Webb JG, Chandavimol M, Thompson CR, et al. Percutaneous aortic valve implantation retrograde from the femoral artery. Circulation 2006; 113: 842–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nashef SAM, Roques R, Hammill BG, et al. European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (EuroSCORE). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1997; 91: 667–84.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nashef SA, Roques F, Michel P, Gauduchean E, Lemeshow SR, Salomon R. European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (EuroSCORE). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999; 16: 9–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roques F, Michel P, Goldstone AR, Nashef SA. The logistic EuroSCORE. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: 881–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Webb JG, Pasupati S, Achtem L, Thompson CR. Rapid pacing to facilitate transcatheter prosthetic heart valve implantation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2006; 68: 199–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Christ M, Sharkova Y, Geldner G, Maisch B. Preoperative and perioperative care for patients with suspected or established aortic stenosis facing noncardiac surgery. Chest 2005; 128: 2944–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Raymer K, Yang H. Patients with aortic stenosis: cardiac complications in non-cardiac surgery. Can J Anesth 1998; 45: 855–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Giovanni JV, Edgar RA, Cranston A. Adenosine induced transient cardiac standstill in catheter interventional procedures for congenital heart disease. Heart 1998; 80: 330–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Webb JG, Daly PA. Attempted balloon catheter obstruction of pulmonary arterial flow in ventricular septal rupture. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1990; 19: 246–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kahn RA, Marin ML, Hollier L, Parsons R, Griepp R. Induction of ventricular fibrillation to facilitate endovascular stent graft repair of thoracic aortic aneurysms. Anesthesiology 1998; 88: 534–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Webb JG, Pasupati S, Humphries K, et al. Percutaneous transarterial aortic valve replacement in selected highrisk patients with aortic stenosis. Circulation 2007; 116: 755–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Canadian Anesthesiologists’ Society 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ronald M. Ree
    • 2
    • 1
  • John B. Bowering
    • 2
    • 1
  • Stephan K. W. Schwarz
    • 2
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology & TherapeuticsThe University of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Department of AnesthesiaSt. Paul’s HospitalVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations