Kim Chulho, Kim Sung-Eun, Jeon Jin Pyeong
Department of Neurology, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Korea.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Seoul Emergency Operations Center, Seoul, Korea.
Neurointervention. 2019 Mar;14(1):17-26. doi: 10.5469/neuroint.2019.00045. Epub 2019 Feb 28.
To assess clinical and angiographic outcomes after endovascular treatment (EVT) in ischemic stroke patients according to anesthesia types (general anesthesia vs. conscious sedation).
A systematic literature review through an online data base between January 1990 and September 2017 was performed. A fixed effect model was used in cases of <50% heterogeneity. The primary outcomes were good clinical outcome at the 3-month follow-up and successful recanalization. A meta-regression analysis was done to estimate primary outcomes of log odds ratio (OR) on onset-to-puncture time (OTP) differences. Publication bias was determined using Begg's funnel plot and additional the Trim and Fill method.
Sixteen articles including 2,662 patients (general anesthesia, n=1,275; conscious sedation, n=1,387) were included. General anesthesia significantly decreased good outcomes than conscious sedation (OR, 0.564; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.354-0.899). However, outcomes did not differ significantly in randomized controlled trials (RCTs; OR, 1.101; 95% CI, 0.395-3.071). Anesthesia type was not associated with successful recanalization (OR, 0.985; 95% CI, 0.787-1.233). General anesthesia increased the risk of mortality (OR, 1.532; 95% CI, 1.187-1.976) and pneumonia (OR, 1.613; 95% CI, 1.172-2.221), but not symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.125; 95% CI, 0.767-1.652). The meta-regression analysis showed no linear relationship between OTP differences and log OR of good outcome (coefficient, 0.0004; P=0.95) or successful recanalization (coefficient, 0.0005; P=0.94), respectively.
General anesthesia seemed to be associated with adverse clinical outcome after EVT. However, its efficacy was not demonstrated in RCTs. Successful recanalization did not differ according to anesthesia type. Studies using individual patient data based on further RCTs are necessary to elucidate anesthesia effect on procedural and clinical outcomes.
根据麻醉类型(全身麻醉与清醒镇静)评估缺血性中风患者血管内治疗(EVT)后的临床和血管造影结果。
通过在线数据库对1990年1月至2017年9月期间的文献进行系统回顾。异质性<50%的情况下使用固定效应模型。主要结局为3个月随访时的良好临床结局和成功再通。进行meta回归分析以估计发病至穿刺时间(OTP)差异对log比值比(OR)主要结局的影响。使用Begg漏斗图和额外的Trim和Fill方法确定发表偏倚。
纳入16篇文章,共2662例患者(全身麻醉,n = 1275;清醒镇静,n = 1387)。全身麻醉组的良好结局显著低于清醒镇静组(OR,0.564;95%置信区间[CI],0.354 - 0.899)。然而,在随机对照试验(RCT)中结局无显著差异(OR,1.101;95% CI,0.395 - 3.071)。麻醉类型与成功再通无关(OR,0.985;95% CI,0.787 - 1.233)。全身麻醉增加了死亡风险(OR,1.532;95% CI,1.187 - 1.976)和肺炎风险(OR,1.613;95% CI,1.172 - 2.221),但与症状性颅内出血无关(OR,1.125;95% CI,0.767 - 1.652)。meta回归分析显示OTP差异与良好结局的log OR(系数,-0.0004;P = 0.95)或成功再通的log OR(系数,-0.0005;P = 0.94)之间均无线性关系。
全身麻醉似乎与EVT后的不良临床结局相关。然而,其疗效在RCT中未得到证实。成功再通在不同麻醉类型间无差异。有必要开展基于进一步RCT的个体患者数据研究,以阐明麻醉对手术及临床结局的影响。