Objective Limited data exist regarding the outcomes of non-cardiac procedures (NCPs) in adult patients after Fontan operations (Fontan patients).
Methods To compare procedural outcomes after NCPs in Fontan patients with outcomes for two matched control groups: patients with repaired congenital heart disease and biventricular circulation (CHD-BiV) and patients with no heart disease (NHD). We defined cyanosis as oxygen saturation <90% and procedural hypoxia as saturation <80% or a decrease in saturation >10% from baseline.
Results There were 538 NCPs in 154 Fontan patients (mean age, 30 years) performed in 1990–2015. Sedation and anaesthesia types were monitored anaesthesia care (256,48%), general anaesthesia (51,9%), minimal sedation (105,20%), local anaesthesia (75,14%) and regional anaesthesia (51,9%). Ninety-three complications occurred in 79 procedures (15%) and included arrhythmia requiring intervention (9), hypotension (14), bradycardia (8), hypoxia (38), heart failure requiring intravenous diuretics (2), acute kidney injury (3), bleeding requiring blood transfusion (1), unplanned procedures for dialysis catheter placement (2), readmission (2), unplanned hospitalisation for hypoxia (8) and unplanned transfer to intensive care unit (1). Baseline cyanosis was the only multivariable risk factor for complications (HR, 1.87 (95% CI 1.14 to 3.67), p=0.04). Procedural complications were more common in the Fontan group (18%) than in the CHD-BiV (5%) and NHD groups (1.4%) (p=0.001).
Conclusions Complications after NCPs were more common in Fontan patients, and baseline cyanosis was a risk factor for complications. All-cause mortality was low and may be related to the multidisciplinary care approach used for Fontan patients at our centre.
- congenital heart disease
- noncardiac surgery
- procedural complications
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors ACE, ARK: Study design, data collection, data analysis, initial drafting, critical review, final revision.
HMC, NMA, SMS: Data analysis, initial drafting, critical review, final revision.
DWB, WCO, CAW, EA: Data analysis, initial drafting, critical review, final revision.
All authors reviewed and approved the final draft of this manuscript.
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval Mayo Institutional Review Board.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.