Objective: Monitored anesthesia care (MAC) has been increasingly used in lieu of general anesthesia (GA) for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We sought to compare outcomes and in-hospital costs between MAC and GA for TAVR at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Methods: A single-center retrospective review was performed of 349 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR (MAC, n = 244 vs GA, n = 105) from January 2014 to December 2019. Baseline patient characteristics, operating room (OR) time, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), and cost, total LOS, hospital cost, total cost, and complication rates were collected. Propensity matching was performed and resulted in 83 matched pairs. Results: In the unmatched TAVR cohort, MAC TAVR was associated with reduced OR time (146 vs 198 min, P < 0.001), ICU LOS (1.4 vs 1.8 days, P < 0.001), total hospital LOS (3.4 vs 5.4 days, P < 0.001), and lower index total cost ($81,300 vs $85,400, P = 0.010). After propensity matching, MAC TAVR patients had reduced OR time (146 vs 196 min, P < 0.05), ICU LOS (1.2 vs 1.7 days, P = 0.006), total LOS (3.5 vs 5.1 days, P = 0.001), and 180-day mortality (2.4% vs 12%, P < 0.03). There was no difference in total hospitalization cost or total cost. Conclusions: In propensity-matched groups, TAVR utilizing MAC is associated with improved OR time efficiency, decreased LOS, and a reduction in 180-day mortality but no significant difference in cost.

Objective: Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has been the standard of care for severe aortic stenosis. In 2019, annual transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) implantations surpassed SAVR. We compared in-hospital costs and outcomes between these two procedures. Methods: A single-center retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent isolated SAVR or TAVR from October 2013 to December 2019. Baseline patient characteristics, operating room (OR) time, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), total LOS, cumulative cost, and complication rates were collected. Propensity matching was performed to identify differences in costs and outcomes between comparable groups. Results: There were 515 patients who met inclusion criteria. TAVR was performed in 402 patients, while SAVR was performed in 113. Propensity matching resulted in 82 matched pairs. The SAVR cohort more frequently spent >1 day in the ICU, had longer total hospital LOS, longer OR time, and higher hospitalization cost. However, TAVR was associated with higher mean OR cost and higher valve cost. The cumulative index admission costs were not significantly different between groups. TAVR patients had less postoperative atrial fibrillation but more frequent pacemaker placement. One-year mortality was similar between SAVR (2.4%) and TAVR (3.8%), but 3-year (5.8% vs 19.2%) and 5-year (5.8% vs 37.2%) mortality favored SAVR. Conclusions: In propensity-matched groups, TAVR was associated with shorter ICU and hospital LOS and OR times but increased permanent pacemaker rates. In addition, while 1-year survival was similar between groups, SAVR had significantly improved 3-year and 5-year survival.

Objective: Outcomes associated with isolated epicardial left atrial appendage (LAA) exclusion in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with a contraindication or intolerance to anticoagulation are not clearly defined, especially in patients with prior stroke. This study evaluated the perioperative safety, medication use, and stroke outcomes for isolated thoracoscopic LAA exclusion for stroke prevention. Methods: A single-center retrospective study was performed of adults undergoing isolated thoracoscopic LAA exclusion with an epicardial exclusion device without a concomitant surgical procedure. Descriptive statistics were performed. Results: Twenty-five patients met the inclusion criteria. The cohort was 68% male ( n = 17) with a mean age of 76.4 ± 6.5 years, a mean preoperative CHA2DS2-VASc score of 4.2 ± 1.4, and a mean preoperative HAS-BLED score of 2.68 ± 1.03. Seventeen patients (68%) had nonparoxysmal AF. There were 11 patients with intolerance of anticoagulation due to intracranial hemorrhage (44%), 6 due to gastrointestinal bleeding (24%), and 4 due to genitourinary bleeding (16%). All procedures were performed thoracoscopically with 100% technical success—the mean LAA stump length was 5.5 ± 2.3 mm on intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography. The median hospital length of stay was 2 (interquartile range [IQR] 1, 6.5) days. The median follow-up time was 430 (IQR 125, 972) days. During follow-up, 1 patient with cerebral angiopathy had temporary neurologic deficits at an outside institution, with brain imaging showing no evidence of ischemic injury. There were no other thromboembolic events over the 38.8 postoperative patient-years examined. All patients were off anticoagulation at last follow-up. Conclusions: This study shows the perioperative safety, technical success, freedom from anticoagulation, and stroke outcomes of isolated thoracoscopic LAA exclusion in patients with AF at high risk for thromboembolic disease.