BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy reduces the risk of stroke in people with recently symptomatic, severe carotid artery stenosis. However, there are significant perioperative risks which may be lessened by performing the operation under local rather than general anaesthetic. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to assess the risks of endarterectomy under local compared with general anaesthetic. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Stroke Group trials register (April 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2003), EMBASE (1980 to 2002), and Index to Scientific and Technical Proceedings (1980 to 1994). We handsearched 13 relevant journals up to 2002, and searched the reference lists of articles identified. We also advertised the review in Vascular News (a newspaper for European vascular specialists) in August 2001. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials and non-randomised studies comparing carotid endarterectomy under local versus general anaesthetic. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer selected studies for inclusion and another independently checked the decisions. Two reviewers assessed trial quality and independently extracted the data. MAIN RESULTS: Seven randomised trials involving 554 operations, and 41 non-randomised studies involving 25622 operations were included. The methodological quality of the non-randomised trials was questionable. Eleven of the non-randomised studies were prospective and 29 reported on a consecutive series of patients. In nine non-randomised studies the number of arteries, as opposed to the number of patients, was unclear. Meta-analysis of the non-randomised studies showed that the use of local anaesthetic was associated with significant reductions in the odds of death (35 studies), stroke (31 studies), stroke or death (26 studies), myocardial infarction (22 studies), and pulmonary complications (7 studies), within 30 days of the operation. Meta-analysis of the randomised studies showed that the use of local anaesthetic was associated with a significant reduction in local haemorrhage (OR = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.79) within 30 days of the operation, but there was no evidence of a reduction in the odds of operative stroke. However, the trials were too small to allow reliable conclusions to be drawn, and in some studies intention-to-treat analyses were not possible because of exclusions. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials comparing carotid endarterectomy performed under local and general anaesthetic. Non-randomised studies suggest potential benefits with the use of local anaesthetic, but these studies may be biased. More randomised studies are needed.
BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy reduces the risk of stroke in people with recently symptomatic, severe carotid artery stenosis. However, there are significant perioperative risks which may be lessened by performing the operation under local rather than general anaesthetic. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to assess the risks of endarterectomy under local compared with general anaesthetic. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Stroke Group trials register (April 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2003), EMBASE (1980 to 2002), and Index to Scientific and Technical Proceedings (1980 to 1994). We handsearched 13 relevant journals up to 2002, and searched the reference lists of articles identified. We also advertised the review in Vascular News (a newspaper for European vascular specialists) in August 2001. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials and non-randomised studies comparing carotid endarterectomy under local versus general anaesthetic. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer selected studies for inclusion and another independently checked the decisions. Two reviewers assessed trial quality and independently extracted the data. MAIN RESULTS: Seven randomised trials involving 554 operations, and 41 non-randomised studies involving 25622 operations were included. The methodological quality of the non-randomised trials was questionable. Eleven of the non-randomised studies were prospective and 29 reported on a consecutive series of patients. In nine non-randomised studies the number of arteries, as opposed to the number of patients, was unclear. Meta-analysis of the non-randomised studies showed that the use of local anaesthetic was associated with significant reductions in the odds of death (35 studies), stroke (31 studies), stroke or death (26 studies), myocardial infarction (22 studies), and pulmonary complications (7 studies), within 30 days of the operation. Meta-analysis of the randomised studies showed that the use of local anaesthetic was associated with a significant reduction in local haemorrhage (OR = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.79) within 30 days of the operation, but there was no evidence of a reduction in the odds of operative stroke. However, the trials were too small to allow reliable conclusions to be drawn, and in some studies intention-to-treat analyses were not possible because of exclusions. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials comparing carotid endarterectomy performed under local and general anaesthetic. Non-randomised studies suggest potential benefits with the use of local anaesthetic, but these studies may be biased. More randomised studies are needed.
Authors: Martijn S Marsman; Jørn Wetterslev; Abdelkarime Kh Jahrome; Christian Gluud; Frans L Moll; Frederik Keus; Giel G Koning Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2021-05-06
Authors: Ata Niyazi Ecevit; Okay Guven Karaca; Mehmet Kalender; Murat Bekmezci; Mehmet Ali Sungur; Osman Tansel Darçın Journal: Cardiovasc J Afr Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 1.167
Authors: Michael J Gough; Andrew Bodenham; Michael Horrocks; Bridget Colam; Steff C Lewis; Peter M Rothwell; Adrian P Banning; David Torgerson; Moira Gough; Demosthenes Dellagrammaticas; Anne Leigh-Brown; Christos Liapis; Charles Warlow Journal: Trials Date: 2008-05-21 Impact factor: 2.279