IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0173777.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improved costs and outcomes with conscious sedation vs general anesthesia in TAVR patients: Time to wake up?

Author

Listed:
  • William Toppen
  • Daniel Johansen
  • Sohail Sareh
  • Josue Fernandez
  • Nancy Satou
  • Komal D Patel
  • Murray Kwon
  • William Suh
  • Olcay Aksoy
  • Richard J Shemin
  • Peyman Benharash

Abstract

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a commonplace procedure for the treatment of aortic stenosis in higher risk surgical patients. With the high cost and steadily increasing number of patients receiving TAVR, emphasis has been placed on optimizing outcomes as well as resource utilization. Recently, studies have demonstrated the feasibility of conscious sedation in lieu of general anesthesia for TAVR. This study aimed to investigate the clinical as well as cost outcomes associated with conscious sedation in comparison to general anesthesia in TAVR. Methods: Records for all adult patients undergoing TAVR at our institution between August 2012 and June 2016 were included using our institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) and American College of Cardiology (ACC) registries. Cost data was gathered using the BIOME database. Patients were stratified into two groups according to whether they received general anesthesia (GA) or conscious sedation (CS) during the procedure. No-replacement propensity score matching was done using the validated STS predicted risk of mortality (PROM) as a propensity score. Primary outcome measure with survival to discharge and several secondary outcome measures were also included in analysis. According to our institution's data reporting guidelines, all cost data is presented as a percentage of the general anesthesia control group cost. Results: Of the 231 patients initially identified, 225 (157 GA, 68 CS) were included for analysis. After no-replacement propensity score matching, 196 patients (147 GA, 49 CS) remained. Overall mortality was 1.5% in the matched population with a trend towards lower mortality in the CS group. Conscious sedation was associated with significantly fewer ICU hours (30 vs 96 hours, p =

Suggested Citation

  • William Toppen & Daniel Johansen & Sohail Sareh & Josue Fernandez & Nancy Satou & Komal D Patel & Murray Kwon & William Suh & Olcay Aksoy & Richard J Shemin & Peyman Benharash, 2017. "Improved costs and outcomes with conscious sedation vs general anesthesia in TAVR patients: Time to wake up?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-12, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0173777
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0173777
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0173777&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0173777?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0173777. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.