BACKGROUND: This study examined outcomes of endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR) using general, spinal, epidural, and local/monitored anesthesia care (MAC) in a multicenter North American hospital database reflecting contemporary anesthesia and surgical practices. METHODS: Elective EVAR cases performed between 2005 and 2008 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Excluded were emergency cases and patients with concomitant procedures requiring general anesthesia. Patient-level comorbidities, characteristics, and intraoperative and postoperative details were examined. Complications were analyzed individually and in aggregate categories, including wound, pulmonary, renal, venous thromboembolic, cardiovascular, operative, and septic. Length of stay (LOS) and 30-day mortality were examined. Characteristics and outcomes were described using mean ± standard deviation or count (%), and comparisons were evaluated for statistical significance using χ(2), Fisher exact test, and univariate linear regression. LOS was analyzed with linear regression techniques using a log transformation. Associations between anesthesia type and outcomes were examined using univariable and multivariable regression techniques. RESULTS: We identified 6009 elective EVAR procedures for analysis. General anesthesia was used in 4868 cases, spinal anesthesia in 419, epidural anesthesia in 331, and local/MAC in 391. Defined morbidity occurred in 11% of patients. Median LOS was 2 (interquartile range, 1-3) days, and mean LOS was 2.8 ± 4.3 days. The 30-day mortality rate was 1.1%. Significant multivariate associations were observed between anesthesia type, pulmonary morbidity, and log-LOS. General anesthesia was associated with an increase in pulmonary morbidity vs spinal (odds ratio [OR], 4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-12.5; P = .020) and local/MAC anesthesia (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.0-6.4; P = .041). Use of general anesthesia was associated with a 10% increase in LOS for general vs spinal anesthesia (95% CI, 4.8%-15.5%; P = .001) and a 20% increase for general vs local/MAC anesthesia (95% CI, 14.1%-26.2%; P < .001). Trends toward increased pulmonary morbidity and LOS were not observed for general vs epidural anesthesia. No significant association between anesthesia type and mortality was observed. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary North American anesthetic and surgical practice, general anesthesia for EVAR was associated with increased postoperative LOS and pulmonary morbidity compared with spinal and local/MAC anesthesia. These data suggest that increasing the use of less-invasive anesthetic techniques may limit postoperative complications and decrease the overall costs of EVAR.
BACKGROUND: This study examined outcomes of endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR) using general, spinal, epidural, and local/monitored anesthesia care (MAC) in a multicenter North American hospital database reflecting contemporary anesthesia and surgical practices. METHODS: Elective EVAR cases performed between 2005 and 2008 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Excluded were emergency cases and patients with concomitant procedures requiring general anesthesia. Patient-level comorbidities, characteristics, and intraoperative and postoperative details were examined. Complications were analyzed individually and in aggregate categories, including wound, pulmonary, renal, venous thromboembolic, cardiovascular, operative, and septic. Length of stay (LOS) and 30-day mortality were examined. Characteristics and outcomes were described using mean ± standard deviation or count (%), and comparisons were evaluated for statistical significance using χ(2), Fisher exact test, and univariate linear regression. LOS was analyzed with linear regression techniques using a log transformation. Associations between anesthesia type and outcomes were examined using univariable and multivariable regression techniques. RESULTS: We identified 6009 elective EVAR procedures for analysis. General anesthesia was used in 4868 cases, spinal anesthesia in 419, epidural anesthesia in 331, and local/MAC in 391. Defined morbidity occurred in 11% of patients. Median LOS was 2 (interquartile range, 1-3) days, and mean LOS was 2.8 ± 4.3 days. The 30-day mortality rate was 1.1%. Significant multivariate associations were observed between anesthesia type, pulmonary morbidity, and log-LOS. General anesthesia was associated with an increase in pulmonary morbidity vs spinal (odds ratio [OR], 4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-12.5; P = .020) and local/MAC anesthesia (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.0-6.4; P = .041). Use of general anesthesia was associated with a 10% increase in LOS for general vs spinal anesthesia (95% CI, 4.8%-15.5%; P = .001) and a 20% increase for general vs local/MAC anesthesia (95% CI, 14.1%-26.2%; P < .001). Trends toward increased pulmonary morbidity and LOS were not observed for general vs epidural anesthesia. No significant association between anesthesia type and mortality was observed. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary North American anesthetic and surgical practice, general anesthesia for EVAR was associated with increased postoperative LOS and pulmonary morbidity compared with spinal and local/MAC anesthesia. These data suggest that increasing the use of less-invasive anesthetic techniques may limit postoperative complications and decrease the overall costs of EVAR.
Authors: Jorg L De Bruin; Annette F Baas; Jaap Buth; Monique Prinssen; Eric L G Verhoeven; Philippe W M Cuypers; Marc R H M van Sambeek; Ron Balm; Diederick E Grobbee; Jan D Blankensteijn Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-05-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Robert S Crawford; Richard P Cambria; Christopher J Abularrage; Mark F Conrad; Robert T Lancaster; Michael T Watkins; Glenn M LaMuraglia Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: J P Henretta; K J Hodgson; M A Mattos; L A Karch; S N Hurlbert; Y Sternbach; D E Ramsey; D S Sumner Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 1999-05 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Jan D Blankensteijn; Sjors E C A de Jong; Monique Prinssen; Arie C van der Ham; Jaap Buth; Steven M M van Sterkenburg; Hence J M Verhagen; Erik Buskens; Diederick E Grobbee Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-06-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: T N Weingarten; F X Whalen; D O Warner; O Gajic; G J Schears; M R Snyder; D R Schroeder; J Sprung Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 9.166
Authors: David K Warren; Sunita J Shukla; Margaret A Olsen; Marin H Kollef; Christopher S Hollenbeak; Michael J Cox; Max M Cohen; Victoria J Fraser Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Amr Mahran; Kirtishri Mishra; Danly Omil-Lima; Bissan Abboud; Michael Wang; Jason Jankowski; Robert Abouassaly; Lee Ponsky; Irma Lengu; Laura Bukavina Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: C V Ioannou; N Kontopodis; E Kehagias; A Papaioannou; A Kafetzakis; G Papadopoulos; D Pantidis; D Tsetis Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Andres Guerra; Calvin Chao; Gabriel A Wallace; Heron E Rodriguez; Mark K Eskandari Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2021-10-20 Impact factor: 1.466