PURPOSE: Compare functional outcomes of acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing embolectomy with either local anesthesia or conscious sedation. Secondarily, identify differences in hemodynamic parameters and complication rates between groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single institution, retrospective review of all acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing embolectomy between January 2014 and July 2018 (n = 185). Patients receiving general anesthesia (n = 27) were excluded. One-hundred and eleven of 158 (70.3%) composed the local anesthesia group, and 47 (29.7%) composed the conscious sedation group. Median age was 71 years (interquartile range 59-79). Seventy-eight (49.4%) were male. The median National Institute of Health stroke scale score was 17.5 (interquartile range 11-21). Hemodynamic, medication, complication, and functional outcome data were collected from the anesthesia protocol and medical records. Good functional outcome was defined as a three-month modified Rankin Scale < 2. A multivariate analysis was performed to estimate the association of anesthesia type on three-month modified Rankin Scale score. RESULTS: Three-month modified Rankin Scale score <2 was similar between groups (p = 0.5). Patients receiving conscious sedation were on average younger than patients receiving local anesthesia (p = 0.01). Conscious sedation patients were more likely to receive intravenous thrombolytic prior to embolectomy (p = 0.025). The complication rate and hemodynamic parameters were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Functional outcome of acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing embolectomy appears to be similar for patients receiving local anesthesia and conscious sedation. This similarity may be beneficial to a future study comparing general anesthesia to local anesthesia and conscious sedation. The use of local anesthesia or conscious sedation does not significantly impact hemodynamic status.
PURPOSE: Compare functional outcomes of acute ischemic strokepatients undergoing embolectomy with either local anesthesia or conscious sedation. Secondarily, identify differences in hemodynamic parameters and complication rates between groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single institution, retrospective review of all acute ischemic strokepatients undergoing embolectomy between January 2014 and July 2018 (n = 185). Patients receiving general anesthesia (n = 27) were excluded. One-hundred and eleven of 158 (70.3%) composed the local anesthesia group, and 47 (29.7%) composed the conscious sedation group. Median age was 71 years (interquartile range 59-79). Seventy-eight (49.4%) were male. The median National Institute of Health stroke scale score was 17.5 (interquartile range 11-21). Hemodynamic, medication, complication, and functional outcome data were collected from the anesthesia protocol and medical records. Good functional outcome was defined as a three-month modified Rankin Scale < 2. A multivariate analysis was performed to estimate the association of anesthesia type on three-month modified Rankin Scale score. RESULTS: Three-month modified Rankin Scale score <2 was similar between groups (p = 0.5). Patients receiving conscious sedation were on average younger than patients receiving local anesthesia (p = 0.01). Conscious sedation patients were more likely to receive intravenous thrombolytic prior to embolectomy (p = 0.025). The complication rate and hemodynamic parameters were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Functional outcome of acute ischemic strokepatients undergoing embolectomy appears to be similar for patients receiving local anesthesia and conscious sedation. This similarity may be beneficial to a future study comparing general anesthesia to local anesthesia and conscious sedation. The use of local anesthesia or conscious sedation does not significantly impact hemodynamic status.
Entities:
Keywords:
Stroke; conscious sedation; embolectomy; local anesthesia
Authors: Rob A van de Graaf; Noor Samuels; Maxim J H L Mulder; Ismail Eralp; Adriaan C G M van Es; Diederik W J Dippel; Aad van der Lugt; Bart J Emmer Journal: Neurology Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Mouhammad A Jumaa; Fan Zhang; Gerardo Ruiz-Ares; Theresa Gelzinis; Amer M Malik; Aitziber Aleu; Jennifer I Oakley; Brian Jankowitz; Ridwan Lin; Vivek Reddy; Syed F Zaidi; Maxim D Hammer; Lawrence R Wechsler; Michael Horowitz; Tudor G Jovin Journal: Stroke Date: 2010-04-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Courtney E Takahashi; Ansgar M Brambrink; Michael F Aziz; Elizabeth Macri; Joshua Raines; Anmol Multani-Kohol; Holly E Hinson; Helmi L Lutsep; Wayne M Clark; Jeremy D Fields Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Melinda J Davis; Bijoy K Menon; Leyla B Baghirzada; Cynthia R Campos-Herrera; Mayank Goyal; Michael D Hill; David P Archer Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 7.892