Comparison of anesthesia management in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a retrospective cohort study

Abstract Background and objectives We aimed to investigate the effects of two different anesthetic techniques in our patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods In this study, 303 patients who underwent TAVI procedure with a diagnosis of severe aortic stenosis between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2018 were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were divided according to the type of anesthesia given during each procedure as; general anesthesia (GA), local anesthesia (LA). Results LA was preferred in 245 (80.8%) of 303 patients who underwent TAVI, while GA was preferred in 58 patients (19.1%). Median ages ​​of our patients who received LA and GA were 83 and 84, respectively. The procedure and anesthesia durations of the patients in the GA group were longer than the LA group (p< 0.00001, p< 0.00001, respectively). Demographic and pre-operative clinical data were similar in comparison between two groups (p> 0.05) except for peripheral artery disease. Hypertension was the most common comorbidity in both groups. While the number of inotrope use was significantly higher in patients who received GA (p< 0.00001), no significant differences were found between LA and GA patients in terms of major complications and mortality (p> 0.05). Intensive care and hospital stays were significantly shorter in the LA group (p= 0.001, p= 0.023, respectively). Conclusion The anesthetic technique of TAVI procedure did not have a significant effect on outcomes including; complications, mortality and success of the procedure. LA provides shorter duration of procedure and hospital stay.

Comparison of two pandemics: H1N1 and SARS-CoV-2

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the clinical, epidemiological, and prognostic features of the H1N1 pandemic in 2009 and the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic in 2020. METHODS: This retrospective study involved subjects from seven centers that were admitted and found to be positive for H1N1 or COVID-19 real-time polymerase chain reaction test. RESULTS: A total of 143 patients with H1N1 and 309 patients with COVID-19 were involved in the study. H1N1 patients were younger than COVID-19 ones. While 58.7% of H1N1 patients were female, 57.9% of COVID-19 patients were male. Complaints of fever, cough, sputum, sore throat, myalgia, weakness, headache, and shortness of breath in H1N1 patients were statistically higher than in COVID-19 ones. The duration of symptoms until H1N1 patients were admitted to the hospital was shorter than that for COVID-19 patients. Leukopenia was more common in COVID-19 patients. C-reactive protein levels were higher in COVID-19 patients, while lactate dehydrogenase levels were higher in H1N1 ones. The mortality rate was also higher in H1N1 cases. CONCLUSIONS: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic is a major public health problem that continues to affect the world with its high rate of contagion. In addition, no vaccines or a specific drug for the benefit of millions of people have been found yet. The H1N1 pandemic is an epidemic that affected the whole world about ten years ago and was prevented by the development of vaccines at a short period. Experience in the H1N1 pandemic may be the guide to prevent the COVID-19 pandemic from a worse end.