PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 6, 2026European Heart Journal0 citations

Impact of conscious sedation or general anesthesia on mitral valve function after percutaneous edge-to-edge reconstruction: a single cohort study

View Full Paper
ARAndi RrokuTKT KempeTTT H Thevathasan

Key Result

Dexmedetomidine conscious sedation for M-TEER showed comparable device effectiveness to general anesthesia (100% vs 98.3%; p=0.619) and shorter procedural duration (84 vs 96 min; p=0.041).

Key Points

  • This study aims to compare mitral valve function outcomes following edge-to-edge repair under conscious sedation versus general anesthesia.
  • Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing M-TEER procedures under dexmedetomidine conscious sedation or general anesthesia.
  • Analysis of device effectiveness and procedural duration, adjusted for baseline characteristics of patients.
  • Comparative analysis of postoperative complications and length of hospital stay between the two sedation groups.
  • Successful implantation rate of 98.9% in both sedation groups.
  • Device effectiveness was similarly high, with discharge rates of MR≤1 at 86.1% for DCS and 83.3% for GA; no significant difference was observed.
  • Procedural duration was significantly shorter in the DCS group (84 minutes) compared to the GA group (96 minutes) with a p-value of 0.041.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=97)

Structured PICO

Does dexmedetomidine conscious sedation improve procedural duration and maintain device effectiveness compared to general anesthesia in patients undergoing M-TEER for severe mitral regurgitation?

P
Population
97 patients with severe mitral regurgitation undergoing percutaneous edge-to-edge repair under dexmedetomidine conscious sedation or general anesthesia.
E
Exposure
Dexmedetomidine conscious sedation (DCS)
C
Comparator
General anaesthesia (GA)
O
Outcome
Device effectiveness (Reduction of mitral regurgitation directly after the procedure and at hospital discharge) and procedure durationcomposite

Dexmedetomidine conscious sedation is a feasible and safe alternative to general anesthesia for M-TEER, offering shorter procedural times without compromising device effectiveness or safety.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 100% vs 98.3%

p-value: p=0.619

Abstract

Abstract Background Percutaneous mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) has emerged as a treatment option in patients with severe primary and secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) not considered suitable candidates for surgery. Currently, most procedures are performed under general anaesthesia (GA), while an increasing number of centres additionally perform the procedure under dexmedetomidine conscious sedation (DCS) in selected patients. Purpose To compare the functional outcome of M-TEER with the MitraClip or PASCAL P10/ACE Device – system in patients receiving the procedure under GA or DCS. Methods Consecutive patients scheduled for M-TEER procedures in DCS or GA were included in this retrospective study. Outcomes were compared using matching criteria (MR etiology, left ventricular ejection fraction, New York Heart Association functional class, Revised Cardiac Risk Index – Score, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, body mass index, coronary heart disease and ASA preoperative physical status classification) to adjust for baseline differences. The primary endpoint included device effectiveness (Reduction of MR directly after the procedure and at hospital discharge) and procedure duration. The main safety endpoint was defined as a composite of all-cause death, stroke, cardiac-structural complication, cardiogenic shock, acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy, moderate or severe bleeding according to the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC). Results 37 patients in the DCS group and 60 patients in the GA group were analysed. Successful implantation of the M-TEER device was achieved in 98.9% of (96 of 97) patients. Device effectiveness was comparably high in both groups (100 % in DCS vs. 98.3% in GA; p=0.619) with significant shorter procedural duration favoring DCS DCS 84min (72-111) vs.GA 96min (75-137) (p=0.041). Total hospital length of stay (LOS) from the index procedure did not differ (DCS:4.8d (IQR) vs. GA:5.4d (IQR); p =0.344). The matching-analysis yielded comparable groups of 36 pairs. Fluoroscopy time (12 ± 6 minutes in the DCS group versus 15 ± 6 minutes in the GA group, P=0.130) and dose area product (9.97 (SD) Gy/cm2 in the GA group and 7.03 (SD) Gy/cm2 in the DCS group, P=0.066) were equally distributed in both cohorts (Figure 2). Moreover, device effectiveness was comparable in both groups at discharge (MR≤1:DCS 86.1% vs.GA 83.3%;p=0.743), with patients exhibiting mostly trivial MR in the DCS group (DCS 41.7% vs.GA 11.1%;p=0.027) (Figure 1). No difference between GA and DCS was observed with respect to the occurrence of the composite safety endpoint (p=0.155). There was no conversion to open surgery and no differences in postoperative complications between the two groups. Conclusions DCS is a feasible and safe option for M-TEER procedures with shorter procedural times compared to GA. No disadvantages with respect to procedural outcome or complications were observed.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Rroku et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Severe primary and secondary mitral regurgitation (n=97). Dexmedetomidine conscious sedation vs. General anesthesia was evaluated on Device effectiveness (reduction of MR directly after the procedure and at hospital discharge) and procedure duration (p=0.619). Dexmedetomidine conscious sedation for M-TEER showed comparable device effectiveness to general anesthesia (100% vs 98.3%; p=0.619) and shorter procedural duration (84 vs 96 min; p=0.041).

synapsesocial.com/papers/698586498f7c464f2300a51fhttps://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf784.3244
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper