Anesthetic Management and Outcomes of Endovascular Treatment of Basilar Artery Occlusion: Results From the ATTENTION Registry.

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Stroke Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-23 DOI:10.5853/jos.2023.00318
Chunrong Tao, Guangxiong Yuan, Pengfei Xu, Hao Wang, Peiyang Zhou, Tingyu Yi, Kai Li, Tao Cui, Jun Gao, Rui Li, Jun Sun, Chao Zhang, Li Wang, Tianlong Liu, Jianlong Song, Yamei Yin, Thanh N Nguyen, Qing Li, Wei Hu
{"title":"Anesthetic Management and Outcomes of Endovascular Treatment of Basilar Artery Occlusion: Results From the ATTENTION Registry.","authors":"Chunrong Tao, Guangxiong Yuan, Pengfei Xu, Hao Wang, Peiyang Zhou, Tingyu Yi, Kai Li, Tao Cui, Jun Gao, Rui Li, Jun Sun, Chao Zhang, Li Wang, Tianlong Liu, Jianlong Song, Yamei Yin, Thanh N Nguyen, Qing Li, Wei Hu","doi":"10.5853/jos.2023.00318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>To examine the clinical and safety outcomes after endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO) with different anesthetic modalities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective analysis using data from the Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion (ATTENTION) registry. Patients were divided into two groups defined by anesthetic modality performed during EVT: general anesthesia (GA) or non-general anesthesia (non-GA). The association between anesthetic management and clinical outcomes was evaluated in a propensity score matched (PSM) cohort and an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) cohort to adjust for imbalances between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analytic sample included 1,672 patients from 48 centers. The anesthetic modality was GA in 769 (46.0%) and non-GA in 903 (54.0%) patients. In our primary analysis with the PSM-based cohort, non-GA was comparable to GA concerning the primary outcome (adjusted common odds ratio [acOR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.25; P=0.91). Mortality at 90 days was 38.4% in the GA group and 35.8% in the non-GA group (adjusted risk ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.08; P=0.44). In our secondary analysis with the IPTW-based cohort, the anesthetic modality was significantly associated with the distribution of modified Rankin Scale at 90 days (acOR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.20 to 1.75]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this nationally-representative observational study, acute ischemic stroke patients due to BAO undergoing EVT without GA had similar clinical and safety outcomes compared with patients treated with GA. These findings provide the basis for large-scale randomized controlled trials to test whether anesthetic management provides meaningful clinical effects for patients undergoing EVT.</p>","PeriodicalId":17135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Stroke","volume":"25 3","pages":"399-408"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/24/98/jos-2023-00318.PMC10574300.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5853/jos.2023.00318","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: To examine the clinical and safety outcomes after endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO) with different anesthetic modalities.

Methods: This was a retrospective analysis using data from the Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion (ATTENTION) registry. Patients were divided into two groups defined by anesthetic modality performed during EVT: general anesthesia (GA) or non-general anesthesia (non-GA). The association between anesthetic management and clinical outcomes was evaluated in a propensity score matched (PSM) cohort and an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) cohort to adjust for imbalances between the two groups.

Results: Our analytic sample included 1,672 patients from 48 centers. The anesthetic modality was GA in 769 (46.0%) and non-GA in 903 (54.0%) patients. In our primary analysis with the PSM-based cohort, non-GA was comparable to GA concerning the primary outcome (adjusted common odds ratio [acOR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.25; P=0.91). Mortality at 90 days was 38.4% in the GA group and 35.8% in the non-GA group (adjusted risk ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.08; P=0.44). In our secondary analysis with the IPTW-based cohort, the anesthetic modality was significantly associated with the distribution of modified Rankin Scale at 90 days (acOR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.20 to 1.75]).

Conclusion: In this nationally-representative observational study, acute ischemic stroke patients due to BAO undergoing EVT without GA had similar clinical and safety outcomes compared with patients treated with GA. These findings provide the basis for large-scale randomized controlled trials to test whether anesthetic management provides meaningful clinical effects for patients undergoing EVT.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

基底动脉闭塞的麻醉管理和血管内治疗的结果:来自ATTENTION注册表的结果。
背景和目的:研究不同麻醉方式下急性基底动脉闭塞(BAO)血管内治疗(EVT)后的临床和安全性结果。方法:这是一项回顾性分析,使用来自急性基底动脉闭塞血管内治疗(ATTENTION)注册中心的数据。根据EVT期间的麻醉方式,患者被分为两组:全身麻醉(GA)或非全身麻醉(non-GA)。在倾向评分匹配(PSM)队列和治疗加权反概率(IPTW)队列中评估麻醉管理与临床结果之间的相关性,以调整两组之间的不平衡。结果:我们的分析样本包括来自48个中心的1672名患者。769例(46.0%)患者的麻醉方式为GA,903例(54.0%)患者为非GA。在我们对基于PSM的队列的初步分析中,非GA在主要结果方面与GA相当(调整后的共同优势比[acOR]为1.01;95%置信区间[CI]为0.82至1.25;P=0.91)。GA组90天时的死亡率为38.4%,非GA组为35.8%(调整后风险比为0.95;95%CI为0.83至1.08;P=0.44)。在我们对IPTW队列的二次分析中,麻醉方式与改良Rankin量表在90天时的分布显著相关(acOR:1.45[95%CI:1.20至1.75])。这些发现为大规模随机对照试验提供了基础,以测试麻醉管理是否为接受EVT的患者提供了有意义的临床效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Stroke
Journal of Stroke CLINICAL NEUROLOGYPERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISE-PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
3.70%
发文量
52
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Stroke (JoS) is a peer-reviewed publication that focuses on clinical and basic investigation of cerebral circulation and associated diseases in stroke-related fields. Its aim is to enhance patient management, education, clinical or experimental research, and professionalism. The journal covers various areas of stroke research, including pathophysiology, risk factors, symptomatology, imaging, treatment, and rehabilitation. Basic science research is included when it provides clinically relevant information. The JoS is particularly interested in studies that highlight characteristics of stroke in the Asian population, as they are underrepresented in the literature. The JoS had an impact factor of 8.2 in 2022 and aims to provide high-quality research papers to readers while maintaining a strong reputation. It is published three times a year, on the last day of January, May, and September. The online version of the journal is considered the main version as it includes all available content. Supplementary issues are occasionally published. The journal is indexed in various databases, including SCI(E), Pubmed, PubMed Central, Scopus, KoreaMed, Komci, Synapse, Science Central, Google Scholar, and DOI/Crossref. It is also the official journal of the Korean Stroke Society since 1999, with the abbreviated title J Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信