Background: This study investigates the impact of general anesthesia (GA) versus conscious sedation/local anesthesia (CS/LA) on the outcome of patients with minor stroke and isolated M2 occlusion undergoing immediate mechanical thrombectomy (iMT). Methods: The databases of 16 comprehensive stroke centers were retrospectively screened for consecutive patients with isolated M2 occlusion and a baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≤5 who received iMT. Propensity score matching was used to estimate the effect of GA versus CS/LA on clinical outcomes and procedure-related adverse events. The primary outcome measure was a 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0–1. Secondary outcome measures were a 90-day mRS score of 0–2 and all-cause mortality, successful reperfusion, procedural-related symptomatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, intraprocedural dissections, and new territory embolism. Results: Of the 172 patients who were selected, 55 received GA and 117 CS/LA. After propensity score matching, 47 pairs of patients were available for analysis. We found no significant differences in clinical outcome, rates of efficient reperfusion, and procedural-related complications between patients receiving GA or LA/CS (mRS score 0–1, P = 0.815; mRS score 0–2, P = 0.401; all-cause mortality, P = 0.408; modified Treatment in Cerebral Infarction score 2b–3, P = 0.374; symptomatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, P = 0.082; intraprocedural dissection, P = 0.408; new territory embolism, P = 0.462). Conclusions: In patients with minor stroke and isolated M2 occlusion undergoing iMT, the type of anesthesia does not affect clinical outcome or the rate of procedural-related complications. Our results agree with recent data showing no benefit of one specific anesthesiologic procedure over the other and confirm their generalizability also to patients with minor baseline symptoms. © 2023 The Author(s)

Effect of General Anesthesia Versus Conscious Sedation/Local Anesthesia on the Outcome of Patients with Minor Stroke and Isolated M2 Occlusion Undergoing Immediate Thrombectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Matched Analysis

Bergui, M.;
2024-01-01

Abstract

Background: This study investigates the impact of general anesthesia (GA) versus conscious sedation/local anesthesia (CS/LA) on the outcome of patients with minor stroke and isolated M2 occlusion undergoing immediate mechanical thrombectomy (iMT). Methods: The databases of 16 comprehensive stroke centers were retrospectively screened for consecutive patients with isolated M2 occlusion and a baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≤5 who received iMT. Propensity score matching was used to estimate the effect of GA versus CS/LA on clinical outcomes and procedure-related adverse events. The primary outcome measure was a 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0–1. Secondary outcome measures were a 90-day mRS score of 0–2 and all-cause mortality, successful reperfusion, procedural-related symptomatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, intraprocedural dissections, and new territory embolism. Results: Of the 172 patients who were selected, 55 received GA and 117 CS/LA. After propensity score matching, 47 pairs of patients were available for analysis. We found no significant differences in clinical outcome, rates of efficient reperfusion, and procedural-related complications between patients receiving GA or LA/CS (mRS score 0–1, P = 0.815; mRS score 0–2, P = 0.401; all-cause mortality, P = 0.408; modified Treatment in Cerebral Infarction score 2b–3, P = 0.374; symptomatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, P = 0.082; intraprocedural dissection, P = 0.408; new territory embolism, P = 0.462). Conclusions: In patients with minor stroke and isolated M2 occlusion undergoing iMT, the type of anesthesia does not affect clinical outcome or the rate of procedural-related complications. Our results agree with recent data showing no benefit of one specific anesthesiologic procedure over the other and confirm their generalizability also to patients with minor baseline symptoms. © 2023 The Author(s)
2024
183
432
439
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85185337344&doi=10.1016/j.wneu.2023.12.117&partnerID=40&md5=4f8c2215abec69c38322e6141590db0b
Valente, I.; Alexandre, A.M.; Colò, F.; Brunetti, V.; Frisullo, G.; Camilli, A.; Falcou, A.; Scarcia, L.; Gigli, R.; Scala, I.; Rizzo, P.A.; Abruzzese, S.; Milonia, L.; Piano, M.; Macera, A.; Ruggiero, M.; Da Ros, V.; Bellini, L.; Lazzarotti, G.A.; Cosottini, M.; Caragliano, A.A.; Vinci, S.L.; Gabrieli, J.D.; Causin, F.; Panni, P.; Roveri, L.; Limbucci, N.; Arba, F.; Renieri, L.; Ferretti, S.; Pileggi, M.; Bianco, G.; Romano, D.G.; Frauenfelder, G.; Semeraro, V.; Ganimede, M.P.; Lozupone, E.; Fasano, A.; Lafe, E.; Cavallini, A.M.; Mazzacane, F.; Russo, R.; Bergui, M.; Broccolini, A.; Pedicelli, A.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S1878875023018508-main.pdf

Accesso aperto

Dimensione 468.55 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
468.55 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1969702
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact