Department of Vascular Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai JiaoTong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Vascular Center of Shanghai JiaoTong University, Shanghai, China.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Oct;100(4):679-686. doi: 10.1002/ccd.30326. Epub 2022 Jul 8.
OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND: In the endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA), there is no effective evidence to show preference for a specific anesthetic option. A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the result of different anesthesia in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of RAAA.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies were searched in PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool were applied to evaluate the quality of cohort studies and RCTs, respectively. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to express differences for primary and secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were applied in the primary outcome to illustrate the results further. Significance was set at p < 0.05. Random-effects models were used considering limited research regardless of I < 50%.
Ten cohort studies were included in this meta-analysis. Perioperative mortality was presented as the primary outcome by analyzing eight of these research. Among the included patients, local anesthesia (LA) was considered as a better choice considering perioperative mortality (n = 156/902) rather than general anesthesia (n = 907/3434) with significant difference (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.35-0.67; p < 0.00001; I = 42%). However, no significant difference was found in the secondary outcome: the complication rate, ICU admission rate, postoperative morbidity of pneumonia, myocardial infarction, leg ischemia, and wound complication.
There exists some evidence in this review that LA appears to improve perioperative mortality, especially in hemodynamically stable patients and should be recommended for patients undergoing EVAR with RAAA when appropriate.
目的/背景:在破裂性腹主动脉瘤(RAAA)的血管内治疗中,没有有效的证据表明哪种特定的麻醉选择更具优势。本研究进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估不同麻醉方案在 RAAA 血管内修复(EVAR)中的结果。
在 PubMed、Embase、Ovid 和 Cochrane Library 中检索随机对照试验(RCT)和队列研究。应用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表和 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具分别评估队列研究和 RCT 的质量。使用比值比(OR)和 95%置信区间(CI)表示主要和次要结局的差异。在主要结局中进行亚组分析和敏感性分析,以进一步说明结果。p<0.05 为差异有统计学意义。考虑到研究数量有限且 I²<50%,采用随机效应模型。
本荟萃分析纳入了 10 项队列研究。其中 8 项研究分析了围手术期死亡率作为主要结局。在纳入的患者中,与全身麻醉(GA)相比,局部麻醉(LA)似乎能降低围手术期死亡率(n=156/902),差异有统计学意义(OR:0.49;95%CI:0.35-0.67;p<0.00001;I²=42%)。然而,次要结局如并发症发生率、ICU 入院率、肺炎、心肌梗死、腿部缺血和伤口并发症的术后发病率方面,两组间差异无统计学意义。
本综述提供了一些证据表明,LA 似乎可以降低围手术期死亡率,尤其是对于血流动力学稳定的患者。在适当的情况下,LA 应推荐用于 RAAA 患者的 EVAR。