• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

颈动脉内膜切除术的局部麻醉与全身麻醉

Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.

作者信息

Vaniyapong Tanat, Chongruksut Wilaiwan, Rerkasem Kittipan

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 50200.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 19(12):CD000126. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000126.pub4.

DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000126.pub4
PMID:24353155
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Carotid endarterectomy may significantly reduce the risk of stroke in people with recently symptomatic, severe carotid artery stenosis. However, there are significant perioperative risks that may be reduced by performing the operation under local rather than general anaesthetic. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1996, and previously updated in 2004 and 2008.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether carotid endarterectomy under local anaesthetic: (1) reduces the risk of perioperative stroke and death compared with general anaesthetic; (2) reduces the complication rate (other than stroke) following carotid endarterectomy; and (3) is acceptable to patients and surgeons.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (September 2013), MEDLINE (1966 to September 2013), EMBASE (1980 to September 2013) and Index to Scientific and Technical Proceedings (ISTP) (1980 to September 2013). We also handsearched relevant journals, and searched the reference lists of articles identified.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing the use of local anaesthetic to general anaesthetic for carotid endarterectomy were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We calculated a pooled Peto odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for the following outcomes that occurred within 30 days of surgery: stroke, death, stroke or death, myocardial infarction, local haemorrhage, cranial nerve injuries, and shunted arteries.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 randomised trials involving 4596 operations, of which 3526 were from the single largest trial (GALA). In general, reporting of methodology in the included studies was poor. All studies were unable to blind patients and surgical teams to randomised treatment allocation and for most studies the blinding of outcome assessors was unclear. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of stroke within 30 days of surgery between the local anaesthesia group and the general anaesthesia group. The incidence of strokes in the local anaesthesia group was 3.2% compared to 3.5% in the general anaesthesia group (Peto OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.28). There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients who had a stroke or died within 30 days of surgery. In the local anaesthesia group 3.6% of patients had a stroke or died compared to 4.2% of patients in the general anaesthesia group (Peto OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.16). There was a non-significant trend towards lower operative mortality with local anaesthetic. In the local anaesthesia group 0.9% of patients died within 30 days of surgery compared to 1.5% of patients in the general anaesthesia group (Peto OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.07). However, neither the GALA trial or the pooled analysis were adequately powered to reliably detect an effect on mortality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of patients who had a stroke or died within 30 days of surgery did not differ significantly between the two types of anaesthetic techniques used during carotid endarterectomy. This systematic review provides evidence to suggest that patients and surgeons can choose either anaesthetic technique, depending on the clinical situation and their own preferences.

摘要

背景

对于近期有症状的重度颈动脉狭窄患者,颈动脉内膜切除术可显著降低中风风险。然而,围手术期存在重大风险,通过局部麻醉而非全身麻醉进行手术可降低这些风险。这是Cochrane系统评价的更新版,该评价首次发表于1996年,之前于2004年和2008年更新过。

目的

确定局部麻醉下的颈动脉内膜切除术:(1)与全身麻醉相比,是否能降低围手术期中风和死亡风险;(2)是否能降低颈动脉内膜切除术后的并发症发生率(中风除外);(3)患者和外科医生是否能接受。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane中风组试验注册库(2013年9月)、MEDLINE(1966年至2013年9月)、EMBASE(1980年至2013年9月)和科技会议录索引(ISTP)(1980年至2013年9月)。我们还手工检索了相关期刊,并检索了已识别文章的参考文献列表。

入选标准

纳入比较局部麻醉与全身麻醉用于颈动脉内膜切除术的随机试验。

数据收集与分析

三位综述作者独立评估试验质量并提取数据。我们计算了手术30天内发生的以下结局的合并Peto比值比(OR)及相应的95%置信区间(CI):中风、死亡、中风或死亡、心肌梗死、局部出血、颅神经损伤和动脉分流。

主要结果

我们纳入了14项随机试验,涉及4596例手术,其中3526例来自最大的单项试验(GALA)。总体而言,纳入研究的方法学报告质量较差。所有研究均无法使患者和手术团队对随机治疗分配不知情,且大多数研究中结局评估者的盲法情况不明确。局部麻醉组与全身麻醉组在术后30天内中风发生率无统计学显著差异。局部麻醉组中风发生率为3.2%,全身麻醉组为3.5%(Peto OR 0.92,95%CI 0.67至1.28)。手术30天内发生中风或死亡的患者比例无统计学显著差异。局部麻醉组3.6%的患者发生中风或死亡,全身麻醉组为4.2%(Peto OR 0.85,95%CI 0.63至1.16)。局部麻醉下手术死亡率有降低的非显著趋势。局部麻醉组0.9%的患者在术后30天内死亡,全身麻醉组为1.5%(Peto OR 0.62,95%CI 0.36至1.07)。然而,GALA试验和汇总分析的检验效能均不足以可靠检测对死亡率的影响。

作者结论

在颈动脉内膜切除术中使用的两种麻醉技术,术后30天内发生中风或死亡的患者比例无显著差异。本系统评价提供的证据表明,患者和外科医生可根据临床情况和自身偏好选择任一麻醉技术。

相似文献

1
Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.颈动脉内膜切除术的局部麻醉与全身麻醉
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 19(12):CD000126. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000126.pub4.
2
Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.颈动脉内膜切除术的局部麻醉与全身麻醉比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Oct 13;10(10):CD000126. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000126.pub5.
3
Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.颈动脉内膜切除术的局部麻醉与全身麻醉
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Oct 8(4):CD000126. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000126.pub3.
4
Routine or selective carotid artery shunting for carotid endarterectomy (and different methods of monitoring in selective shunting).颈动脉内膜切除术时常规或选择性颈动脉转流(以及选择性转流中不同的监测方法)。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jun 22;6(6):CD000190. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000190.pub4.
5
Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.颈动脉内膜切除术的局部麻醉与全身麻醉
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004(2):CD000126. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000126.pub2.
6
Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.颈动脉内膜切除术的局部麻醉与全身麻醉
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000(2):CD000126. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000126.
7
Regional (spinal, epidural, caudal) versus general anaesthesia in preterm infants undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy in early infancy.早产低龄婴儿行腹股沟疝修补术时区域麻醉(脊髓麻醉、硬膜外麻醉、骶管麻醉)与全身麻醉的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jun 9;2015(6):CD003669. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003669.pub2.
8
Intravenous versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia for postoperative cognitive outcomes in elderly people undergoing non-cardiac surgery.非心脏手术老年患者术后认知结局:静脉麻醉维持与吸入麻醉维持的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Aug 21;8(8):CD012317. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012317.pub2.
9
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.成人全身麻醉后预防术后恶心呕吐的药物:网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.
10
Nitrous oxide-based techniques versus nitrous oxide-free techniques for general anaesthesia.用于全身麻醉的氧化亚氮技术与无氧化亚氮技术的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Nov 6;2015(11):CD008984. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008984.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Anesthetic management of carotid endarterectomy: an update from Italian guidelines.颈动脉内膜切除术的麻醉管理:来自意大利指南的更新
J Anesth Analg Crit Care. 2022 Jun 6;2(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s44158-022-00052-9.
2
Routine or selective carotid artery shunting for carotid endarterectomy (and different methods of monitoring in selective shunting).颈动脉内膜切除术时常规或选择性颈动脉转流(以及选择性转流中不同的监测方法)。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jun 22;6(6):CD000190. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000190.pub4.
3
Incidence of postoperative, major, adverse cardiac events in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy: A single-center, retrospective study.
接受颈动脉内膜切除术患者术后主要不良心脏事件的发生率:一项单中心回顾性研究。
SAGE Open Med. 2022 Jan 8;10:20503121211070367. doi: 10.1177/20503121211070367. eCollection 2022.
4
Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.颈动脉内膜切除术的局部麻醉与全身麻醉比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Oct 13;10(10):CD000126. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000126.pub5.
5
Regional anaesthesia and outcomes.区域麻醉与预后。
BJA Educ. 2018 Feb;18(2):52-56. doi: 10.1016/j.bjae.2017.10.002. Epub 2017 Nov 27.
6
Safe carotid endarterectomy: "one fits all strategy".安全的颈动脉内膜切除术:“一刀切”策略
Kardiochir Torakochirurgia Pol. 2020 Sep;17(3):137-142. doi: 10.5114/kitp.2020.99077. Epub 2020 Sep 23.
7
The Role of Carotid Stump Pressure in Carotid Endarterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.颈动脉残端压力在颈动脉内膜切除术中的作用:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
Ann Vasc Dis. 2020 Mar 25;13(1):28-37. doi: 10.3400/avd.ra.19-00100.
8
Anaesthetic management in endovascular total aortic arch repair via needle-based in situ fenestration: a case series of 14 patients.经皮原位开窗针技术在血管内全主动脉弓修复术中的麻醉管理:14 例患者的病例系列研究。
J Int Med Res. 2020 Apr;48(4):300060519893517. doi: 10.1177/0300060519893517. Epub 2019 Dec 26.
9
Ultrasound-guided superficial cervical plexus block under dexmedetomidine sedation versus general anesthesia for carotid endarterectomy: a retrospective pilot study.右美托咪定镇静下超声引导颈浅丛阻滞与全身麻醉用于颈动脉内膜切除术的回顾性初步研究
Yeungnam Univ J Med. 2018 Jun;35(1):45-53. doi: 10.12701/yujm.2018.35.1.45. Epub 2018 Jun 30.
10
Qualitative study of clinician and patient perspectives on the mode of anaesthesia for emergency surgery.定性研究临床医生和患者对急诊手术麻醉方式的看法。
Br J Surg. 2020 Jan;107(2):e142-e150. doi: 10.1002/bjs.11243. Epub 2019 Aug 1.