Observational studyPloS one2020
A logistic regression analysis comparing minimalistic approach and intubation anaesthesia in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
Observational study in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of general anesthesia exposure with risk of postoperative delirium in patients receiving transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Local anesthesia alone versus with sedation for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsPatients with postoperative delirium (POD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are ventilated and hospitalized longer and suffer increased in-hospital mortality. This study hypothesized that a minimalistic approach with conscious sedation during transfemoral aortic valve replacement (TF-AVR) protects against delirium, time of mechanical ventilation, and increased length of stay in intensive care unit (ICU) compared to intubation anaesthesia. METHODS AND
results308 patients which underwent TF-AVR in our centre between 01/2013 and 08/2017 were retrospectively evaluated regarding postoperative delirium, time of mechanical ventilation, and days in ICU. TF-AVR was performed with intubation anaesthesia in 245 patients and with conscious sedation in 63. The operative risk estimated by the logEUROScore was similar in both groups (intubation: 13.28 +/-9.06%, conscious sedation: 12.24 +/-6.77%, p = 0.395). In the conscious sedation group procedure duration was shorter (0.61 +/-0.91h vs. 1.75 +/-0.96h, p<0.001). The risk for intraprocedural complications was not influenced by the anaesthesia method (OR conscious sedation instead of intubation 1.66, p = 0.117), but days on ICU (-2.21 days, p<0.0001) and minutes of mechanical ventilation (-531.2 min, p < 0.0001) were reduced. Furthermore, the risk of POD was decreased when TF-AVR was performed under conscious sedation (6.35% vs. 18.18%, OR 0.29, p = 0.021).
conclusionsTime of mechanical ventilation, risk of POD, and days on ICU were substantially reduced in patients who underwent TF-AVR under conscious sedation. Our data suggest that TF-AVR with conscious sedation is safe with a beneficial postoperative course in clinical practice, and should be considered the favoured approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.