Richard A Armstrong1, Yolande G Squire2, Chris A Rogers3, Robert J Hinchliffe4, Ronelle Mouton2. 1. Department of Anaesthesia, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK. Electronic address: richard.armstrong@nbt.nhs.uk. 2. Department of Anaesthesia, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK. 3. Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. 4. Surgical Trials Centre, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is used increasingly in the management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), including in the emergency setting for ruptured AAA. The lower mortality among patients undergoing emergency EVAR under local anesthesia (LA) observed in the Immediate Management of Patients with Rupture: Open Versus Endovascular Repair trial has sparked renewed interest in the anesthesia choice for EVAR. This systematic review evaluates the effect of mode of anesthesia on outcomes after EVAR. DESIGN: The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The primary outcome was in-hospital/30-day mortality, and both emergency and elective EVAR were included. The relative risk of death was estimated for each individual study without adjustment for potential confounding factors. SETTING: Hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 39,744 patients from 22 nonrandomized studies were included in the analysis. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen studies in 23,202 patients compared LA to general anesthesia (GA) and reported in-hospital/30-day mortality. The unadjusted risk of death after emergency EVAR with LA was lower than with GA. Trends in elective surgery were less clear. CONCLUSION: There is some evidence across both emergency and elective settings to suggest that mode of anesthesia may be associated with improved outcomes. In particular, LA appears to have a positive effect on outcome after emergency EVAR. Because of the lack of randomized trial data, a significant risk of confounding remains. The optimal mode of anesthesia for EVAR should be investigated further and the reasons why particular anesthesia techniques are chosen for particular patients identified.
OBJECTIVE:Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is used increasingly in the management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), including in the emergency setting for ruptured AAA. The lower mortality among patients undergoing emergency EVAR under local anesthesia (LA) observed in the Immediate Management of Patients with Rupture: Open Versus Endovascular Repair trial has sparked renewed interest in the anesthesia choice for EVAR. This systematic review evaluates the effect of mode of anesthesia on outcomes after EVAR. DESIGN: The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The primary outcome was in-hospital/30-day mortality, and both emergency and elective EVAR were included. The relative risk of death was estimated for each individual study without adjustment for potential confounding factors. SETTING: Hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 39,744 patients from 22 nonrandomized studies were included in the analysis. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen studies in 23,202 patients compared LA to general anesthesia (GA) and reported in-hospital/30-day mortality. The unadjusted risk of death after emergency EVAR with LA was lower than with GA. Trends in elective surgery were less clear. CONCLUSION: There is some evidence across both emergency and elective settings to suggest that mode of anesthesia may be associated with improved outcomes. In particular, LA appears to have a positive effect on outcome after emergency EVAR. Because of the lack of randomized trial data, a significant risk of confounding remains. The optimal mode of anesthesia for EVAR should be investigated further and the reasons why particular anesthesia techniques are chosen for particular patients identified.
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
Authors: Juliet Blakeslee-Carter; Zdenek Novak; John Axley; William F Gaillard; Graeme E McFarland; Benjamin J Pearce; Emily L Spangler; Marc A Passman; Adam W Beck Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 1.607
Authors: Anna Burban; Aleksandra Idzik; Agata Gelo; Krzysztof J Filipiak; Tomasz Jakimowicz; Katarzyna Jama; Marcin Grabowski; Aleksandra Gasecka; Aleksander Siniarski Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-08-12