Comparing sedation vs. general anaesthesia in transoesophageal echocardiography-guided percutaneous transcatheter mitral valve repair: a meta-analysis.

AIMS: Transoesophageal echocardiography-guided percutaneous transcatheter mitral valve repair (TOE-guided PMVR) using edge-to-edge leaflet plication is typically performed under general anaesthesia (GA). Increasing evidence supports the efficacy and safety of PMVR performed under conscious sedation (CS) or deep sedation (DS). We performed a meta-analysis comparing safety and efficacy of CS/DS vs. GA in PMVR. METHODS AND RESULTS: A comprehensive search was performed using PubMed, CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Study characteristics, participant demographics, and procedural outcomes with both types of anaesthesia were analysed. Out of 73 articles, five met inclusion criteria. Overall, there was no significant difference in the primary outcome of procedural success rate [odds ratio (OR) 0.75; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-1.88, I2= 0.0%, P = 0.538] or post-procedure in-hospital mortality (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.38-2.71, I2= 0.0%, P = 0.970) in the patients undergoing PMVR under CS/DS vs. GA. The secondary endpoint of intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) was significantly shorter in patients under CS/DS vs. GA (standardized mean difference, SMD = -0.97; 95% CI -1.75 to -0.20; P = 0.014), but the hospital LOS (SMD = 0.36; 95% CI -0.77 to 0.04, P = 0.078) did not show a statistically significant difference between the groups, although it was shorter in the CS/DS group. No difference was observed between CS/DS and GA in fluoroscopy time, procedure time, or complications, including pneumonia, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, and major bleeding. CONCLUSION: CS or DS has lower ICU LOS, but comparable procedural success rate and in-hospital mortality, making it a potential alternative to GA for TOE-guided PMVR.

Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction along with Zwolle Risk Score for Risk Stratification to Enhance Safe and Early Discharge in STEMI Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Introduction Zwolle risk score (ZRS) is a validated scoring system to determine the time of discharge in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) also provides prognostic information after ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We studied that the addition of LVEF to ZRS variable can improve decision making in safe and early discharge in STEMI patients post-primary coronary intervention. Methods Overall, 249 STEMI patients were studied retrospectively. LVEF was considered as an independent variable. The patients having LVEF <50% were under Group A and LVEF ≥50% were under Group B. Groups were analyzed by model comparison for overall hospital length of stay (LOS) and Intensive care unit (ICU) LOS post-primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Results There were 123 patients in Group A and 126 patients in Group B. Comparison for primary outcomes showed significant difference with hospital length of stay (LOS) being 3.1 ± 2.3 days in Group A versus 2.1 ± 0.8 days in Group B (p < 0.001). Similarly, ICU stay was also significantly higher in Group A with 36.5 ± 31.4 hours versus 24.0 ± 11.8 hours for Group B, which led to prolonged hospitalization for patients with LVEF <50%. Model 1 that considers ZRS individually is nested within Model 2 where ZRS and LVEF are considered together. The profile log-likelihood ratio test favors model 2 over model 1 (p < 0.0001). Similarly for ICU LOS, R 2 = 0.12 (Model 1) < R 2 = 0.20 (Model 2). The F test favors model 2 over model 1 (p < 0.0001). Conclusion We concluded that adding LVEF to Zwolle risk score gives a better model for risk stratification in STEMI patients to decide early and safe discharge post-primary PCI.