Tao Chunrong, Yuan Guangxiong, Xu Pengfei, Wang Hao, Zhou Peiyang, Yi Tingyu, Li Kai, Cui Tao, Gao Jun, Li Rui, Sun Jun, Zhang Chao, Wang Li, Liu Tianlong, Song Jianlong, Yin Yamei, Nguyen Thanh N, Li Qing, Hu Wei
Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Division of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China.
Department of Emergency, Xiangtan Central Hospital, Xiangtan, China.
J Stroke. 2023 Sep;25(3):399-408. doi: 10.5853/jos.2023.00318. Epub 2023 Aug 23.
To examine the clinical and safety outcomes after endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO) with different anesthetic modalities.
This was a retrospective analysis using data from the Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion (ATTENTION) registry. Patients were divided into two groups defined by anesthetic modality performed during EVT: general anesthesia (GA) or non-general anesthesia (non-GA). The association between anesthetic management and clinical outcomes was evaluated in a propensity score matched (PSM) cohort and an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) cohort to adjust for imbalances between the two groups.
Our analytic sample included 1,672 patients from 48 centers. The anesthetic modality was GA in 769 (46.0%) and non-GA in 903 (54.0%) patients. In our primary analysis with the PSM-based cohort, non-GA was comparable to GA concerning the primary outcome (adjusted common odds ratio [acOR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.25; P=0.91). Mortality at 90 days was 38.4% in the GA group and 35.8% in the non-GA group (adjusted risk ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.08; P=0.44). In our secondary analysis with the IPTW-based cohort, the anesthetic modality was significantly associated with the distribution of modified Rankin Scale at 90 days (acOR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.20 to 1.75]).
In this nationally-representative observational study, acute ischemic stroke patients due to BAO undergoing EVT without GA had similar clinical and safety outcomes compared with patients treated with GA. These findings provide the basis for large-scale randomized controlled trials to test whether anesthetic management provides meaningful clinical effects for patients undergoing EVT.
探讨不同麻醉方式下行血管内治疗(EVT)治疗急性基底动脉闭塞(BAO)后的临床及安全性结局。
这是一项回顾性分析,使用急性基底动脉闭塞血管内治疗(ATTENTION)登记处的数据。患者根据EVT期间实施的麻醉方式分为两组:全身麻醉(GA)或非全身麻醉(非GA)。在倾向评分匹配(PSM)队列和治疗加权逆概率(IPTW)队列中评估麻醉管理与临床结局之间的关联,以调整两组之间的不平衡。
我们的分析样本包括来自48个中心的1672例患者。麻醉方式为GA的有769例(46.0%),非GA的有903例(54.0%)。在我们基于PSM队列的初步分析中,非GA与GA在主要结局方面具有可比性(调整后的共同优势比[acOR],1.01;95%置信区间[CI],0.82至1.25;P=0.91)。GA组90天死亡率为38.4%,非GA组为35.8%(调整后的风险比,0.95;95%CI,0.83至1.08;P=0.44)。在我们基于IPTW队列的二次分析中,麻醉方式与90天时改良Rankin量表的分布显著相关(acOR:1.45[95%CI:1.20至1.75])。
在这项具有全国代表性的观察性研究中,因BAO接受非GA的EVT治疗的急性缺血性脑卒中患者与接受GA治疗的患者具有相似的临床及安全性结局。这些发现为大规模随机对照试验提供了基础,以测试麻醉管理是否能为接受EVT治疗的患者带来有意义的临床效果。