Dataset Information

General Anesthesia Versus Conscious Sedation for Intracranial Mechanical Thrombectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

ABSTRACT: Background Endovascular therapy is the standard of care for severe acute ischemic stroke caused by large-vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation, but there is uncertainty regarding the optimal anesthetic approach during this therapy. Meta-analyses of observational studies suggest that general anesthesia increases morbidity and mortality compared with conscious sedation. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to examine the effect of anesthetic strategy during endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke. Methods and Results Systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines has been registered with the PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Ongoing Systematic Reviews) ( CRD 42018103684). Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched through August 1, 2018. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model to pool odds ratio with corresponding 95% CI . The primary outcome was 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin Scale 0-2). In the results, 3 trials with a total of 368 patients were selected. Among patients with ischemic stroke undergoing endovascular therapy, general anesthesia was significantly associated with higher odds of functional independence (odds ratio 1.87, 95% CI 1.15-3.03, I²=17%) and successful recanalization (odds ratio 1.94, 95% CI 1.13-3.3) compared with conscious sedation. However, general anesthesia was associated with a higher risk of 20% mean arterial pressure decrease (odds ratio 10.76, 95% CI 5.25-22.07). There were no significant differences in death, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, anesthesiologic complication, intensive care unit length of stay, pneumonia, and interventional complication. Conclusions Moderate-quality evidence suggests that general anesthesia results in significantly higher rates of functional independence than conscious sedation in patients with ischemic stroke undergoing endovascular therapy. Large randomized clinical trials are required to confirm the benefit.

SUBMITTER: Zhang Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6645641 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

General Anesthesia Versus Conscious Sedation for Intracranial Mechanical Thrombectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Zhang Yu Y Jia Lu L Fang Fang F Ma Lu L Cai Bowen B Faramand Andrew A

Journal of the American Heart Association 20190611 12

Background Endovascular therapy is the standard of care for severe acute ischemic stroke caused by large-vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation, but there is uncertainty regarding the optimal anesthetic approach during this therapy. Meta-analyses of observational studies suggest that general anesthesia increases morbidity and mortality compared with conscious sedation. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to examine the effect of anesthetic strat ...[more]

PMID: 31181981

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe impact of anesthesia strategy on the outcomes of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients undergoing endovascular treatment is currently controversy. Thus, we performed this meta-analysis to compare the differences of clinical and angiographic outcomes between general anesthesia (GA) and conscious sedation (CS).MethodsA literature search in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Knowledge databases through February 2019 was conducted for related records on GA and CS of AIS undergoing endovascular treatment. The results of the studies were pooled and meta-analyzed with fixed- or random-effect model based on heterogeneity test in total and subgroup analyses.ResultsTwenty-three studies including 6703 patients were analyzed in this meta-analysis. We found that patients in the GA group have lower odds of favorable functional outcome (mRS scores ≤2) compared with the CS group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.77), and higher risk of mortality (OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.49-1.90), pneumonia (OR = 1.78, 95% CI: 1.40-2.26), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 1.64, 95% CI: 1.13-2.37). However, no significant differences were seen between the groups in the rate of recanalization (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.89-1.28), vessel dissection or perforation (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.98-1.03) and asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.96-1.47). While in the RCT subgroup analysis, we found patients in the GA group does not show lower rate of favorable functional outcome compared with the CS group (OR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.17-2.89). And there was no significant difference in the rate of mortality between GA and CS groups during RCT subgroup analysis (OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.43-1.27).ConclusionsAIS patients performed endovascular treatment under GA compared with CS was associated with worse functional outcome and increased rate of mortality, but differences in worsened outcomes do not exist when one looks into the GA vs. CS RCTs. Moreover, these findings are mainly based on the retrospective studies and additional multi-center randomized controlled trials to definitively address these issues is warranted.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Two common methods of treating pediatric dental patients with severe early childhood caries (S-ECC) are general anesthesia (GA) and conscious sedation (CS). We sought to first evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating S-ECC with GA versus CS and then compare the cost-effectiveness at 2 time points: 2011 and 2015. METHODS:We used a decision tree model to produce 2-y estimates of costs and outcomes from the Medicaid perspective. The model cohort consisted of healthy 3-y-olds with S-ECC in need of a theoretical set of dental treatments to be performed under either a single GA visit or 3 CS visits. Outcomes were measured in caries-free months. Costs were evaluated in 2015 US dollars. Costs, probabilities, and outcomes were estimated from published data, expert opinion, and Medicaid billing at an academic health center. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS:As compared with CS, GA resulted in 4 additional caries-free months per child. The cost of a caries-free month for GA versus CS rose from $596 in 2011 to $881 in 2015. These findings were sensitive to loss to follow-up for subsequent CS visits and total cost of GA. CONCLUSIONS:Comprehensive S-ECC treatment had better outcomes when performed under GA versus CS. However, GA was not cost saving when compared with CS. While the cost of dental treatment increased for both GA and CS from 2011 to 2015, the cost rose faster for GA. These results have important implications due to the increasing cost to Medicaid insurance and the rising number of young children being treated for S-ECC under GA. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT:Medicaid policy makers can use the results of this study to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dental treatment for young children with S-ECC at 2 time points: 2011 and 2015. Compared with CS, GA resulted in a longer amount of time during which children were free from dental caries but at a higher cost. The cost difference rose from 2011 to 2015.

Project description:Background: Endovascular therapy is the standard treatment for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients caused by a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation, whereas the impacts of general anesthesia (GA) vs. conscious sedation (CS) for such procedures remained as a continued debate. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We restricted our search to RCTs that examined the clinical outcomes of endovascular therapy with GA vs. CS. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess study quality. Random-effects or fixed-effects meta-analyses were used for evaluating all outcomes. Results: A total of three randomized clinical trials met our inclusion criteria, with 368 individuals enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive GA or CS during endovascular therapy. In a meta-analysis of these trials, patients in the GA group were associated with favorable functional outcome (mRS score ≤ 2) compared with the CS group (pooled OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.17-2.79, P = 0.008). Besides, patients in the GA group had higher odds of successful reperfusion (pooled OR = 1.80, 95% CI: 1.05-3.08, P = 0.033), but no significant differences were seen in symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (pooled OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.11-2.57, P = 0.308), vessel dissection or perforation (pooled OR = 1.38, 95% CI: 0.30-6.31, P = 0.679), migration of embolus to a new territory (pooled OR = 2.28, 95% CI: 0.89-5.87, P = 0.085), post-operative pneumonia (pooled OR = 1.74, 95% CI: 0.76-4.01, P = 0.149), and all-cause mortality at 90 days (pooled OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.43-1.26, P = 0.263) compared with the CS group. Conclusion: Performing endovascular therapy with GA, compared with CS, improves functional independence after 90 days significantly for patients with AIS caused by a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation. However, additional larger and multi-center randomized controlled trials to definitively confirm our findings are warranted for the limitation of the small sample size in this study.

Dataset Information

General Anesthesia Versus Conscious Sedation for Intracranial Mechanical Thrombectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Publications

General Anesthesia Versus Conscious Sedation for Intracranial Mechanical Thrombectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets