Suppr超能文献

机械取栓术中全身麻醉与清醒镇静的比较

General Anesthesia versus Conscious Sedation in Mechanical Thrombectomy.

作者信息

Feil Katharina, Herzberg Moriz, Dorn Franziska, Tiedt Steffen, Küpper Clemens, Thunstedt Dennis C, Hinske Ludwig C, Mühlbauer Konstanze, Goss Sebastian, Liebig Thomas, Dieterich Marianne, Bayer Andreas, Kellert Lars

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU), Munich, Germany.

Department of Neurology & Stroke, Eberhard-Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.

出版信息

J Stroke. 2021 Jan;23(1):103-112. doi: 10.5853/jos.2020.02404. Epub 2021 Jan 31.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Anesthesia regimen in patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is still an unresolved issue.

METHODS

We compared the effect of anesthesia regimen using data from the German Stroke Registry-Endovascular Treatment (GSR-ET) between June 2015 and December 2019. Degree of disability was rated by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and good outcome was defined as mRS 0-2. Successful reperfusion was assumed when the modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction scale was 2b-3.

RESULTS

Out of 6,635 patients, 67.1% (n=4,453) patients underwent general anesthesia (GA), 24.9% (n=1,650) conscious sedation (CS), and 3.3% (n=219) conversion from CS to GA. Rate of successful reperfusion was similar across all three groups (83.0% vs. 84.2% vs. 82.6%, P=0.149). Compared to the CA-group, the GA-group had a delay from admission to groin (71.0 minutes vs. 61.0 minutes, P<0.001), but a comparable interval from groin to flow restoration (41.0 minutes vs. 39.0 minutes). The CS-group had the lowest rate of periprocedural complications (15.0% vs. 21.0% vs. 28.3%, P<0.001). The CS-group was more likely to have a good outcome at follow-up (42.1% vs. 34.2% vs. 33.5%, P<0.001) and a lower mortality rate (23.4% vs. 34.2% vs. 26.0%, P<0.001). In multivariable analysis, GA was associated with reduced achievement of good functional outcome (odds ratio [OR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.94; P=0.004) and increased mortality (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.64; P<0.001). Subgroup analysis for anterior circulation strokes (n=5,808) showed comparable results.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide further evidence that CS during MT has advantages over GA in terms of complications, time intervals, and functional outcome.

摘要

背景与目的

接受机械取栓术(MT)患者的麻醉方案仍是一个未解决的问题。

方法

我们使用2015年6月至2019年12月德国卒中登记处血管内治疗(GSR - ET)的数据比较了麻醉方案的效果。残疾程度采用改良Rankin量表(mRS)评定,良好结局定义为mRS 0 - 2。当脑梗死改良溶栓量表为2b - 3时,假定再灌注成功。

结果

在6635例患者中,67.1%(n = 4453)的患者接受全身麻醉(GA),24.9%(n = 1650)接受清醒镇静(CS),3.3%(n = 219)从CS转为GA。三组的成功再灌注率相似(83.0%对84.2%对82.6%,P = 0.149)。与GA组相比,CS组从入院到腹股沟穿刺有延迟(71.0分钟对61.0分钟,P < 0.001),但从腹股沟穿刺到血流恢复的间隔时间相当(41.0分钟对39.0分钟)。CS组围手术期并发症发生率最低(15.0%对21.0%对28.3%,P < 0.001)。CS组在随访时更有可能获得良好结局(42.1%对34.2%对33.5%,P < 0.001)且死亡率更低(23.4%对34.2%对26.0%,P < 0.001)。在多变量分析中,GA与良好功能结局的实现降低相关(优势比[OR],0.82;95%置信区间[CI],0.71至0.94;P = 0.004)且死亡率增加(OR,1.42;95%CI,1.23至1.64;P < 0.001)。前循环卒中(n = 5808)的亚组分析显示了类似的结果。

结论

我们提供了进一步的证据,表明MT期间的CS在并发症、时间间隔和功能结局方面优于GA。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ea7/7900389/ee9c3d1dd0e2/jos-2020-02404f1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验