Anesthesia on Clinical Outcomes in an Extended Time Window During Endovascular Stroke Therapy: Exploratory Analysis of the ANGEL-ACT Registry.

IF 2.3 2区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Xinyan Wang, Fa Liang, Youxuan Wu, Baixue Jia, Xiaoli Zhang, Minyu Jian, Haiyang Liu, Anxin Wang, Zhongrong Miao, Ruquan Han
{"title":"Anesthesia on Clinical Outcomes in an Extended Time Window During Endovascular Stroke Therapy: Exploratory Analysis of the ANGEL-ACT Registry.","authors":"Xinyan Wang, Fa Liang, Youxuan Wu, Baixue Jia, Xiaoli Zhang, Minyu Jian, Haiyang Liu, Anxin Wang, Zhongrong Miao, Ruquan Han","doi":"10.1097/ANA.0000000000000959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Data on the impact of different anesthesia methods on clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing endovascular therapy (EVT) in extended windows are limited. This study compared clinical outcomes in patients with stroke having general anesthesia (GA), conscious sedation (CS), or local anesthesia (LA) during EVT in extended (>6 h) time windows.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an exploratory analysis of data from the ANGEL-ACT registry. The primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included the proportions of patients with mRS scores of 0 to 1, 0 to 2, and 0 to 3, and safety outcomes were any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH, or mortality within 90 days. Multivariate analyses, inverse probability of treatment weighting, and coarsened exact matching were used to adjust for indication bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 646 patients were included in the analysis (GA,280; CS, 103; LA, 263). Patients having LA during EVT were more likely to have a favorable mRS score (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.28 to 2.40) and a lower incidence of symptomatic ICH (aOR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.76) than those having GA group. Similarly, CS was associated with greater odds of favorable 90-day mRS scores compared with GA (aOR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.11 to 2.56). Posterior circulation stroke was overrepresented in the GA group (29.6%) and may be a reason for the worse outcomes in the GA group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients who received LA or CS had better neurological outcomes than those who received GA within extended time windows in a real-world setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":16550,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ANA.0000000000000959","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Data on the impact of different anesthesia methods on clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing endovascular therapy (EVT) in extended windows are limited. This study compared clinical outcomes in patients with stroke having general anesthesia (GA), conscious sedation (CS), or local anesthesia (LA) during EVT in extended (>6 h) time windows.

Methods: We conducted an exploratory analysis of data from the ANGEL-ACT registry. The primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included the proportions of patients with mRS scores of 0 to 1, 0 to 2, and 0 to 3, and safety outcomes were any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH, or mortality within 90 days. Multivariate analyses, inverse probability of treatment weighting, and coarsened exact matching were used to adjust for indication bias.

Results: A total of 646 patients were included in the analysis (GA,280; CS, 103; LA, 263). Patients having LA during EVT were more likely to have a favorable mRS score (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.28 to 2.40) and a lower incidence of symptomatic ICH (aOR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.76) than those having GA group. Similarly, CS was associated with greater odds of favorable 90-day mRS scores compared with GA (aOR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.11 to 2.56). Posterior circulation stroke was overrepresented in the GA group (29.6%) and may be a reason for the worse outcomes in the GA group.

Conclusions: Patients who received LA or CS had better neurological outcomes than those who received GA within extended time windows in a real-world setting.

血管内卒中治疗过程中麻醉对临床结果的影响:ANGEL-ACT 登记的探索性分析。
目的:关于不同麻醉方法对急性缺血性脑卒中患者在延长时间窗内接受血管内治疗(EVT)的临床预后影响的数据十分有限。本研究比较了脑卒中患者在延长时间窗(>6 小时)内接受 EVT 时全身麻醉(GA)、有意识镇静(CS)或局部麻醉(LA)的临床疗效:我们对 ANGEL-ACT 登记处的数据进行了探索性分析。主要结果是90天时的改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分。次要结果包括 mRS 评分为 0 至 1 分、0 至 2 分和 0 至 3 分的患者比例,安全性结果包括任何颅内出血 (ICH)、无症状 ICH 或 90 天内死亡率。多变量分析、逆概率治疗加权和精确匹配用于调整适应症偏差:共有 646 例患者纳入分析(GA,280 例;CS,103 例;LA,263 例)。与GA组相比,EVT期间接受LA治疗的患者更有可能获得良好的mRS评分(调整后的比值比[aOR]:1.75;95% CI:1.28至2.40),症状性ICH的发生率也更低(aOR:0.33;95% CI:0.14至0.76)。同样,与 GA 相比,CS 与 90 天 mRS 评分良好的几率更大相关(aOR:1.69;95% CI:1.11 至 2.56)。后循环卒中在GA组所占比例过高(29.6%),这可能是GA组预后较差的一个原因:结论:在真实世界环境中,接受LA或CS治疗的患者的神经系统预后优于在延长时间窗内接受GA治疗的患者。
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
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
10.80%
发文量
119
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology (JNA) is a peer-reviewed publication directed to an audience of neuroanesthesiologists, neurosurgeons, neurosurgical monitoring specialists, neurosurgical support staff, and Neurosurgical Intensive Care Unit personnel. The journal publishes original peer-reviewed studies in the form of Clinical Investigations, Laboratory Investigations, Clinical Reports, Review Articles, Journal Club synopses of current literature from related journals, presentation of Points of View on controversial issues, Book Reviews, Correspondence, and Abstracts from affiliated neuroanesthesiology societies. JNA is the Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care, the Neuroanaesthesia and Critical Care Society of Great Britain and Ireland, the Association de Neuro-Anesthésiologie Réanimation de langue Française, the Wissenschaftlicher Arbeitskreis Neuroanästhesie der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizen, the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Deutschsprachiger Neuroanästhesisten und Neuro-Intensivmediziner, the Korean Society of Neuroanesthesia, the Japanese Society of Neuroanesthesia and Critical Care, the Neuroanesthesiology Chapter of the Colegio Mexicano de Anesthesiología, the Indian Society of Neuroanesthesiology and Critical Care, and the Thai Society for Neuroanesthesia.
×
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