Local Versus General Anesthesia in Emergency Endovascular Repair of Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

IF 1.7 2区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Journal of Endovascular Therapy Pub Date : 2025-02-21 DOI:10.1177/15266028251320516
Renxi Li, Anton Sidawy, Bao-Ngoc Nguyen
{"title":"Local Versus General Anesthesia in Emergency Endovascular Repair of Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.","authors":"Renxi Li, Anton Sidawy, Bao-Ngoc Nguyen","doi":"10.1177/15266028251320516","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While general anesthesia (GA) has been the common choice of anesthesia for patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), local anesthesia (LA) has been proposed as an effective alternative for eligible patients. However, the choice of anesthesia in emergency EVAR situations remains less explored. Therefore, this study aimed to perform a retrospective analysis to compare the 30-day outcomes of patients who underwent emergency infrarenal EVAR receiving either LA or GA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent emergency infrarenal EVAR were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) targeted database from 2012 to 2022. Exclusion criteria included age less than 18 years, acute intraoperative conversion to open surgery, and intraoperative anesthesia conversion. The 1:1 propensity-score matching and multivariable logistic regression were separately used to balance preoperative factors between patients who received LA and GA. Thirty-day postoperative outcomes were examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 258 (14.58%) and 1512 (85.42%) patients who underwent emergency EVAR under LA and GA, respectively. After multivariable analysis, patients who were under LA had lower mortality (11.24% vs 13.96%, aOR=0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.395-0.944, p=0.03), pulmonary complications (10.85% vs 17.59%, aOR=0.495, 95% CI=0.322-0.76, p<0.01), renal complications (5.04% vs 7.47%, aOR=0.545, 95% CI=0.303-0.983, p=0.04), wound complications (0.39% vs 3.64%, aOR=0.089, 95% CI=0.012-0.649, p=0.02), and 30-day readmission (6.59% vs 11.24%, aOR=0.564, 95% CI=0.334-0.953, p=0.03). Moreover, patients under LA had shorter operative time (p<0.01) and shorter length of stay (p=0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The LA is associated with better 30-day outcomes in emergency infrarenal EVAR. Therefore, in emergency EVAR, it may be advisable to consider LA over GA for eligible patients. Prospective studies in the future can be warranted to further support this anesthesia practice.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>The choice of anesthesia in emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remains unexplored. This study performed a retrospective analysis to compare the 30-day outcomes of patients who underwent emergency infrarenal EVAR receiving local anesthesia (LA) or general anesthesia (GA). After propensity-score matching/multivariable analysis to balance preoperative differences, patients under LA were found to have lower 30-day mortality, pulmonary, renal, and wound complications, 30-day readmission, shorter operative time, and shorter hospital stay. In emergency EVAR, it may be advisable to consider LA over GA for eligible patients. Prospective studies in the future can be warranted to further support this anesthesia practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":50210,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"15266028251320516"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028251320516","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: While general anesthesia (GA) has been the common choice of anesthesia for patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), local anesthesia (LA) has been proposed as an effective alternative for eligible patients. However, the choice of anesthesia in emergency EVAR situations remains less explored. Therefore, this study aimed to perform a retrospective analysis to compare the 30-day outcomes of patients who underwent emergency infrarenal EVAR receiving either LA or GA.

Methods: Patients who underwent emergency infrarenal EVAR were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) targeted database from 2012 to 2022. Exclusion criteria included age less than 18 years, acute intraoperative conversion to open surgery, and intraoperative anesthesia conversion. The 1:1 propensity-score matching and multivariable logistic regression were separately used to balance preoperative factors between patients who received LA and GA. Thirty-day postoperative outcomes were examined.

Results: There were 258 (14.58%) and 1512 (85.42%) patients who underwent emergency EVAR under LA and GA, respectively. After multivariable analysis, patients who were under LA had lower mortality (11.24% vs 13.96%, aOR=0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.395-0.944, p=0.03), pulmonary complications (10.85% vs 17.59%, aOR=0.495, 95% CI=0.322-0.76, p<0.01), renal complications (5.04% vs 7.47%, aOR=0.545, 95% CI=0.303-0.983, p=0.04), wound complications (0.39% vs 3.64%, aOR=0.089, 95% CI=0.012-0.649, p=0.02), and 30-day readmission (6.59% vs 11.24%, aOR=0.564, 95% CI=0.334-0.953, p=0.03). Moreover, patients under LA had shorter operative time (p<0.01) and shorter length of stay (p=0.02).

Conclusion: The LA is associated with better 30-day outcomes in emergency infrarenal EVAR. Therefore, in emergency EVAR, it may be advisable to consider LA over GA for eligible patients. Prospective studies in the future can be warranted to further support this anesthesia practice.

Clinical impact: The choice of anesthesia in emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remains unexplored. This study performed a retrospective analysis to compare the 30-day outcomes of patients who underwent emergency infrarenal EVAR receiving local anesthesia (LA) or general anesthesia (GA). After propensity-score matching/multivariable analysis to balance preoperative differences, patients under LA were found to have lower 30-day mortality, pulmonary, renal, and wound complications, 30-day readmission, shorter operative time, and shorter hospital stay. In emergency EVAR, it may be advisable to consider LA over GA for eligible patients. Prospective studies in the future can be warranted to further support this anesthesia practice.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
203
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endovascular Therapy (formerly the Journal of Endovascular Surgery) was established in 1994 as a forum for all physicians, scientists, and allied healthcare professionals who are engaged or interested in peripheral endovascular techniques and technology. An official publication of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists (ISEVS), the Journal of Endovascular Therapy publishes peer-reviewed articles of interest to clinicians and researchers in the field of peripheral endovascular interventions.
期刊最新文献
Electrosurgical In Situ Fenestration of Aortic Endograft. Videolaparoscopic-Guided Saccography and Direct Sac Embolization After Standard EVAR. In Vitro Investigation of Microcatheter Behavior During Microsphere Injection in Transarterial Radioembolization. Gore Tag Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis in Acute Aortic Syndromes: A Case Series. Radiographic Characterization of Inferior Vena Cava and Its Reaction Following Filter Placement: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1