Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia
August 30, 2026 · via Europe PMC
Long-Term Survival of Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Under General Anesthesia Versus Monitored Anesthesia Care.
Samanidis G, Kanakis M, Koziakas IG, +6 more, Balanika M
AI summary — for doctors, generated from the abstract only
General anaesthesia versus monitored anaesthesia care did not affect long-term survival after transfemoral TAVI.
What was studied
A single-centre retrospective study of 1,390 TAVI patients (2015-2024): 508 under GA and 882 under MAC.
Key findings
- 30-day mortality was 1.6% with GA vs 0.6% with MAC (p = 0.08)
- Survival at 7 years was 40% vs 46.9% (p = 0.16)
- Adjusted hazard ratio for GA vs MAC was 0.94 (95% CI 0.74-1.18)
Clinical relevance
Sedation versus GA for TAVI can be chosen on patient and logistical grounds.
Who should care
Limitations
Retrospective, single-centre, and choice of anaesthesia was not randomised.
Choose GA or MAC for TAVI based on patient factors; long-term survival does not appear to differ.
This is an AI-generated summary of the published abstract, not a clinical recommendation. It may not reflect the full text or subsequent updates — verify against the original source before acting on it.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to evaluate the long-term survival of patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) by general anesthesia (GA) versus monitored anesthesia care (MAC).
DESIGN
Retrospective (observational) study.
SETTING
Single center.
PARTICIPANTS
Between 2015 and 2024, a total of 1,390 patients with severe aortic valve stenosis underwent TAVI with GA or MAC.
INTERVENTIONS
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation by the transfemoral approach.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
GA was used in 508 patients and MAC in 882 patients. The 30-day mortality was 1.6% (8 patients) in GA versus 0.6% (5 patients) in MAC (p = 0.08). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that survival at 1, 3, 5, and 7 years was 91.1%, 75.6%, 59.8%, and 40% in GA versus 93.2%, 75.5%, 63.2%, and 46.9% in MAC, respectively (p = 0.16). Multivariable analysis using a Cox proportional hazards model demonstrated that anesthetic management with GA versus MAC (adjusted for age, sex, coronary artery disease, previous percutaneous intervention, EuroSCORE II, postprocedural cerebral vascular accident, permanent pacemaker implantation, valve-in-valve TAVI, and TAVI period) did not significantly affect the long-term survival of patients after TAVI (hazard ratio, 0.94, 95% CI, 0.74-1.18; p = 0.58).
CONCLUSIONS
Anesthetic management with GA or MAC did not affect the long-term survival of patients after TAVI.
DOI
10.1053/j.jvca.2026.08.158
PMID
42760240
Research metadata (titles, abstracts, authors, publication dates) is sourced from Europe PMC, which aggregates content from PubMed/MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and other providers under the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM/NCBI). NLM does not claim copyright on abstracts; the original journal publishers or authors may hold rights to the full articles. AI-generated summaries are derived only from the abstract, never the full text, and are always labeled as AI-generated.
Want more like this?
Browse more from the feed. A free account unlocks the full feed, saving and communities.
Back to the research feed