A sufentanil-based rapid cardiac anesthesia regimen in children undergoing percutaneous minimally-invasive intraoperative device closure of ventricular septal defect

Abstract Objective: To assess the effectiveness and safety of fast-track cardiac anesthesia using the short-acting opioid sufentanil in children undergoing intraoperative device closure of ventricular septal defect (VSD). Methods: This retrospective clinical study included 65 children who underwent intraoperative device closure of VSD between January 2017 and June 2017. Patients were diagnosed with isolated perimembranous VSD by transthoracic echocardiography. Then, they were divided into two groups, group F (n=30), whose patients were given sufentanil-based fast-track cardiac anesthesia, and group C (n=35), whose patients were given conventional cardiac anesthesia. Perioperative clinical data were analyzed. Results: No significant differences were found between the preoperative clinical parameters and intraoperative hemodynamic indices between the two groups. In group C, compared with group F, the postoperative duration of mechanical ventilation, the length of stay in the intensive care unit, the length of hospital stay, and the hospital costs were significantly increased. Conclusion: In this retrospective study at a single center, sufentanil-based fast-track cardiac anesthesia was shown to be a safe and effective technique for minimally-invasive intraoperative device closure of VSD in children, which was performed with reduced in-hospital costs.

A comparative study of perventricular and percutaneous device closure treatments for isolated ventricular septal defect: a chinese single-institution experience

Abstract Objectives: To compare the advantages and disadvantages of perventricular and percutaneous procedures for treating isolated ventricular septal defect (VSD). Methods: A total of 572 patients with isolated VSD were selected in our hospital between January 2015 and December 2016. The patients' median age and weight were five years (1-26 years) and 29 kg (9-55 kg), respectively. The median diameter of VSD was 6.0 mm (5-10 mm). Patients were divided into two groups. In group A, perventricular device closure was performed in 427 patients; in group B, 145 patients underwent percutaneous device closure. Results: Four hundred twelve patients in group A and 135 patients in group B underwent successful closure. The total occlusion rate was 98.5% (immediately) and 99.5% (3-month follow-up) in group A, which were not significantly different from those in group B (97.7% and 100%, respectively). Patients in group A had longer intensive care unit (ICU) stay than those in group B, but patients in group B experienced significantly longer operative times than those in group A. The follow-up period ranged from 8 months to 1.5 year (median, 1 year). During the follow-up period, late-onset complete atrioventricular block occurred in two patients. No other serious complications were noted in the remaining patients. Conclusion: Both procedures are safe and effective treatments for isolated VSD. The percutaneous procedure has obvious advantages of shorter ICU stay and less trauma than the perventricular procedure. However, the perventricular procedure is simpler to execute, results in a shorter operative time, and avoids X-ray exposure.