General anesthesia vs procedural sedation for failed NeuroThrombectomy undergoing rescue stenting: intention to treat analysis.
Angioplasty
Stroke
Thrombectomy
Journal
Journal of neurointerventional surgery
ISSN: 1759-8486
Titre abrégé: J Neurointerv Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101517079
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
11
07
2022
accepted:
16
10
2022
medline:
6
11
2023
pubmed:
5
1
2023
entrez:
4
1
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There is little data available to guide optimal anesthesia management during rescue intracranial angioplasty and stenting (ICAS) for failed mechanical thrombectomy (MT). We sought to compare the procedural safety and functional outcomes of patients undergoing rescue ICAS for failed MT under general anesthesia (GA) vs non-general anesthesia (non-GA). We searched the data from the Stenting and Angioplasty In Neuro Thrombectomy (SAINT) study. In our review we included patients if they had anterior circulation large vessel occlusion strokes due to intracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) or middle cerebral artery (MCA-M1/M2) segments, failed MT, and underwent rescue ICAS. The cohort was divided into two groups: GA and non-GA. We used propensity score matching to balance the two groups. The primary outcome was the shift in the degree of disability as measured by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included functional independence (90-day mRS0-2) and successful reperfusion defined as mTICI2B-3. Safety measures included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and 90-day mortality. Among 253 patients who underwent rescue ICAS, 156 qualified for the matching analysis at a 1:1 ratio. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were balanced between both groups. Non-GA patients had comparable outcomes to GA patients both in terms of the overall degree of disability (mRS ordinal shift; adjusted common odds ratio 1.29, 95% CI [0.69 to 2.43], P=0.43) and rates of functional independence (33.3% vs 28.6%, adjusted odds ratio 1.32, 95% CI [0.51 to 3.41], P=0.56) at 90 days. Likewise, there were no significant differences in rates of successful reperfusion, sICH, procedural complications or 90-day mortality among both groups. Non-GA seems to be a safe and effective anesthesia strategy for patients undergoing rescue ICAS after failed MT. Larger prospective studies are warranted for more concrete evidence.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There is little data available to guide optimal anesthesia management during rescue intracranial angioplasty and stenting (ICAS) for failed mechanical thrombectomy (MT). We sought to compare the procedural safety and functional outcomes of patients undergoing rescue ICAS for failed MT under general anesthesia (GA) vs non-general anesthesia (non-GA).
METHODS
METHODS
We searched the data from the Stenting and Angioplasty In Neuro Thrombectomy (SAINT) study. In our review we included patients if they had anterior circulation large vessel occlusion strokes due to intracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) or middle cerebral artery (MCA-M1/M2) segments, failed MT, and underwent rescue ICAS. The cohort was divided into two groups: GA and non-GA. We used propensity score matching to balance the two groups. The primary outcome was the shift in the degree of disability as measured by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included functional independence (90-day mRS0-2) and successful reperfusion defined as mTICI2B-3. Safety measures included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and 90-day mortality.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Among 253 patients who underwent rescue ICAS, 156 qualified for the matching analysis at a 1:1 ratio. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were balanced between both groups. Non-GA patients had comparable outcomes to GA patients both in terms of the overall degree of disability (mRS ordinal shift; adjusted common odds ratio 1.29, 95% CI [0.69 to 2.43], P=0.43) and rates of functional independence (33.3% vs 28.6%, adjusted odds ratio 1.32, 95% CI [0.51 to 3.41], P=0.56) at 90 days. Likewise, there were no significant differences in rates of successful reperfusion, sICH, procedural complications or 90-day mortality among both groups.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Non-GA seems to be a safe and effective anesthesia strategy for patients undergoing rescue ICAS after failed MT. Larger prospective studies are warranted for more concrete evidence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36597943
pii: jnis-2022-019376
doi: 10.1136/jnis-2022-019376
doi:
Types de publication
Review
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e240-e247Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: RGN: reports consulting fees for advisory roles with Stryker Neurovascular, Cerenovus, Medtronic, Phenox, Anaconda, Genentech, Biogen, Prolong Pharmaceuticals, Imperative Care and stock options for advisory roles with Brainomix, Viz-AI, Corindus Vascular Robotics, Vesalio, Ceretrieve, Astrocyte and Cerebrotech. DCH is a consultant for Stryker and Vesalio and holds stock options at Viz.AI. ARA is a consultant for Stryker Neurovascular. AEH - 1. Consultant/speaker: Medtronic, Microvention, Stryker, Penumbra, Cerenovus, Genentech, GE Healthcare, Scientia, Balt, Viz.ai, Insera therapeutics, Proximie, NovaSignal and Vesalio. 2. Principal investigator: COMPLETE study Penumbra, LVO SYNCHRONISE-Viz.ai. 3. Steering committee/publication committee member: SELECT, DAWN, SELECT 2, EXPEDITE II, EMBOLISE, CLEAR. 4. Proctor: Pipeline, FRED, Wingspan, and Onyx. 5. Supported by grants from: GE Healthcare. TNN: Research support from Medtronic, SVIN. SOG reports consulting fees for advisory roles with Stryker Neurovascular, Medtronic and microvention. Research support from Medtronic, Stryker, Microvention, VizAI. AA is consultant for Cerenovus. JB is an Advisory Board Member and consultant for Longeviti Neuro Solutions, and Consultant for Q’Apel Medical. BG is a consultant for Medtronic and Microvention. RAH: is a consultant for Medtronic, Stryker, Cerenovus, Microvention, Balt, Phenox, Rapid Medical, and Q’Apel, advisory board for MiVI, eLum, Three Rivers, Shape Medical and Corindus. Unrestricted research grant from NIH, Interline Endowment, Microvention, Stryker, CNX. Investor/stockholder for InNeuroCo, Cerebrotech, eLum, Endostream, Three Rivers Medical Inc, Scientia, RisT, BlinkTBI, and Corindus. ES: reports a speakers’ agreement with Stryker. AA: is on advisory board for iSchema View. PK is a member of the editorial board of JNIS. JF is a member of editorial board of JNIS. JES reports consulting fees from Ceribell, speakers’ bureau for AstraZeneca (both unrelated to the present work).