Article Text

This article has a correction. Please see:

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Original article
Effect of thoracic epidural analgesia on clinical outcomes following transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation
  1. Ignacio J Amat-Santos1,
  2. Eric Dumont1,
  3. Jacques Villeneuve1,
  4. Daniel Doyle1,
  5. Michel Rheault1,
  6. Dominique Lavigne1,
  7. Jerôme Lemieux1,
  8. André St-Pierre1,
  9. Michael Mok1,
  10. Marina Urena1,
  11. Luis Nombela-Franco1,
  12. Steve Blackburn1,
  13. Mathieu Simon1,
  14. Christine Bourgault1,
  15. José Luis Carrasco1,
  16. Philippe Pibarot1,
  17. Melanie Côté1,
  18. Robert DeLarochellière1,
  19. David J Cohen2,
  20. Josep Rodés-Cabau1
  1. 1Quebec Heart and Lung Institute, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
  2. 2Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Josep Rodés-Cabau, Quebec Heart Lung Institute, Laval University, 2725 chemin Ste-Foy, G1V 4G5 Quebec city, QC G1V 4G5, Canada; josep.rodes{at}


Objective To determine the impact of perioperative thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) on acute and late outcomes following transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI).

Patients and intervention A total of 135 consecutive patients who underwent TA-TAVI were included. All patients received catheter-based pain control, either via TEA (TEA group, n=74) or intercostal local analgesia with a catheter placed at the surgical incision site (non-TEA group, n=61), depending on the preference of the anaesthesiologist responsible for the case.

Main outcome measures Pain level during early postoperative period (verbal rating scale from 1 to 10), 30-day/in-hospital complications and mortality, and 1-year mortality.

Results There were no differences in baseline or procedural characteristics between groups except for a lower left ventricular ejection fraction in the TEA group. The maximal pain score related to thoracotomy in the postoperative period was higher in the non-TEA group as compared with the TEA group (4 (IQR: 3–5)) vs 2 (IQR: 1–3), p<0.001). Non-TEA was associated with a higher rate of pulmonary complications (p<0.05 for nosocomial pneumonia, reintubation and tracheostomy). The 30-day/in-hospital mortality rate was higher in the non-TEA group (22.9% vs 2.7% in the TEA group, p<0.001). At 1-year follow-up, overall mortality remained higher in the non-TEA group (31.1%) compared with the TEA group (10.8%), p=0.005. Similar periprocedural and late results were obtained in a propensity score-matched analysis that included 100 matched patients. In the multivariable analysis, STS score (p=0.027) and absence of TEA (p=0.039) were independent predictors of increased cumulative late mortality.

Conclusions TEA provided superior analgesia following TA-TAVI, and was associated with a dramatic reduction in periprocedural respiratory complications, and both, short- and long-term mortality. These results highlight the importance of obtaining optimal analgesia following TA-TAVI to improve the results associated with this procedure.

  • Aortic valve disease
  • transcatheter aortic valve implantation
  • transapical
  • anaesthetics
  • interventional cardiology
  • non-coronary intervention
  • percutaneous valve therapy
  • myocardial ischaemia and infarction
  • cardiac function
  • coronary artery disease
  • coronary physiology
  • allied specialities
  • coronary collateral circulation
  • chronic total occlusion
  • EBM
  • aortic stenosis
  • valve disease
  • prosthetic heart valves
  • coronary stenting
  • statistics
  • mitral stenosis

Statistics from


  • Funding Dr IJA-S received support from the Institute of Heart Sciences (ICICOR, Clinical Hospital of Valladolid, Spain).

  • Competing interests Dr ED is consultant for Edwards Lifesciences; Dr DJC has received research grant support from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic Inc. Dr JR-C is consultant for Edwards Lifesciences and St Jude Medical.

  • Ethics approval The study protocol was performed in accordance with the institutional ethics committee.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

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.

Linked Articles