Premium
Rationale, development, implementation, and initial results of a fast track protocol for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)
Author(s) -
Marcantuono Rebecca,
Gutsche Jacob,
BurkeJulien Maureen,
Anwaruddin Saif,
Augoustides John G.,
Jones David,
Mangino – Blanchard Lisa,
Hoke Nicole,
Houseman Stephanie,
Li Robert,
Patel Prakash,
Stetson Robert,
Walsh Elizabeth,
Szeto Wilson Y.,
Herrmann Howard C.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
catheterization and cardiovascular interventions
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.988
H-Index - 116
eISSN - 1522-726X
pISSN - 1522-1946
DOI - 10.1002/ccd.25749
Subject(s) - medicine , valve replacement , fast track , intensive care unit , emergency medicine , surgery , cardiology , stenosis
Background The care pathway for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), particularly in the US, was initially based on open surgical techniques and often includes general anesthesia, transesophageal echocardiographic monitoring, and cardiothoracic intensive care unit (ICU) stays. Whether a subgroup of patients could benefit from early extubation, fewer days in the ICU, and early ambulation in terms of both cost and effectiveness is unknown. Methods and Results A fast track (FT) protocol was initiated at two institutions in our health system with specific inclusion criteria. Patients with complications or morbidity post procedure deemed ineligible to continue on the FT pathway were designated as deviations. Baseline characteristics, success and deviations, subsequent course, and direct costs were compared for FT eligible and ineligible patients over a 6‐month study period. Among 99 patients undergoing Transfemoral TAVR, 39 (39%) met FT inclusion criteria. The mean age of eligible and ineligible patients was similar at 85 years, but by design, eligible patients had fewer co‐morbid conditions. Successful completion of the FT protocol was achieved in 28 patients (72%). Patients on the FT had shorter ICU stays (28 ± 103 vs 45 ± 46 hours, P < 0.0001) and post‐operative length of stay (4.3 ± 4.4 vs 7.2 ± 5.3 days, P < 0.0001), and incurred lower direct costs ($44,923 ± $14,187 vs $56, 339 ± 17,808, P < 0.0001). Conclusions It is feasible to identify a large percentage of suitable patients preprocedure who are eligible for a FT postprocedure care pathway. There was no evidence for compromise of care and successful completion of the pathway was associated with shorter length of stay and fewer direct costs. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.