Anesthetic considerations in robotic mitral valve surgery.

Kent H Rehfeldt, J Valery Andre, Matthew J Ritter
Author Information
  1. Kent H Rehfeldt: Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
  2. J Valery Andre: Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
  3. Matthew J Ritter: Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Abstract

The robotic approach to cardiac surgery offers patients numerous potential advantages compared with a traditional sternotomy approach including shorter hospital length of stay, reduced pain, fewer blood transfusions, and a quicker return to normal daily activities. At the same time, robotic cardiac surgery requires that the anesthesiologist employs several subspecialty skillsets in order to provide optimal care for these patients. Multiple different regional anesthesia techniques may be used to improve analgesia, reduce opioid dosages, and facilitate rapid extubation at the conclusion of the case. Several peripheral cannulation strategies for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) exist and the anesthesia team may assist with percutaneous cannulation of the superior vena cava (SVC) or positioning of an endo-pulmonary vent. Similarly the anesthesiologist may be asked to percutaneously cannulate the coronary sinus for retrograde cardioplegia delivery. The need for one-lung ventilation (OLV) and heavy reliance on transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) occupy much of the anesthesiologist's attention during these cases. Variations in institutional practice exist. Reviews of current practice and future studies may help refine the anesthetic approach to robot-assisted cardiac surgery.

Keywords

References

  1. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008 Aug;136(2):436-41 [PMID: 18692654]
  2. Surgery. 2006 Aug;140(2):263-7 [PMID: 16904978]
  3. Ann Card Anaesth. 2010 May-Aug;13(2):169-75 [PMID: 20442552]
  4. Cardiology. 2009;114(1):59-66 [PMID: 19365117]
  5. Pain Physician. 2014 Sep-Oct;17(5):E651-3 [PMID: 25247916]
  6. Innovations (Phila). 2015 Nov-Dec;10 (6):416-9 [PMID: 26633002]
  7. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2010 Mar;14(1):47-8 [PMID: 20472625]
  8. Ann Card Anaesth. 2015 Jan-Mar;18(1):58-68 [PMID: 25566713]
  9. Br J Anaesth. 2016 Sep;117(3):382-6 [PMID: 27543533]
  10. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2011 Aug;25(4):721-30 [PMID: 21620728]
  11. Anaesthesia. 2013 Nov;68(11):1107-13 [PMID: 23923989]
  12. Anaesthesia. 2007 Mar;62(3):231-8 [PMID: 17300299]
  13. Postgrad Med J. 2014 Aug;90(1066):467-74 [PMID: 24958894]
  14. Int J Med Robot. 2006 Mar;2(1):16-20 [PMID: 17520609]
  15. J Clin Anesth. 2016 Nov;34:91-7 [PMID: 27687353]
  16. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2012 Nov;59(9):470-5 [PMID: 22939099]
  17. Korean J Pain. 2016 Jul;29(3):189-92 [PMID: 27413485]
  18. Anesth Analg. 2006 Nov;103(5):1113-4 [PMID: 17056941]
  19. Anaesthesia. 2011 Sep;66(9):847-8 [PMID: 21831090]
  20. Int J Med Robot. 2006 Sep;2(3):225-32 [PMID: 17520636]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0surgerycardiacmayroboticapproachpatientsanesthesiologistanesthesiacannulationcardiopulmonarybypassCPBexisttransesophagealechocardiographyTEEpracticeoffersnumerouspotentialadvantagescomparedtraditionalsternotomyincludingshorterhospitallengthstayreducedpainfewerbloodtransfusionsquickerreturnnormaldailyactivitiestimerequiresemploysseveralsubspecialtyskillsetsorderprovideoptimalcareMultipledifferentregionaltechniquesusedimproveanalgesiareduceopioiddosagesfacilitaterapidextubationconclusioncaseSeveralperipheralstrategiesteamassistpercutaneoussuperiorvenacavaSVCpositioningendo-pulmonaryventSimilarlyaskedpercutaneouslycannulatecoronarysinusretrogradecardioplegiadeliveryneedone-lungventilationOLVheavyrelianceoccupymuchanesthesiologist'sattentioncasesVariationsinstitutionalReviewscurrentfuturestudieshelprefineanestheticrobot-assistedAnestheticconsiderationsmitralvalveAnesthesiarobotics

Similar Articles

Cited By (1)