ImportanceGeneral anesthesia and procedural sedation are common practice for mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke. However, risks and benefits of each strategy are unclear.ObjectiveTo determine whether general anesthesia or procedural sedation for anterior circulation large-vessel occlusion acute ischemic stroke thrombectomy are associated with a difference in periprocedural complications and 3-month functional outcome.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis open-label, blinded end point randomized clinical trial was conducted between August 2017 and February 2020, with final follow-up in May 2020, at 10 centers in France.Adults with occlusion of the intracranial internal carotid artery and/or the proximal middle cerebral artery treated with thrombectomy were enrolled.InterventionsPatients were assigned to receive general anesthesia with tracheal intubation (n = 135) or procedural sedation (n = 138).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe prespecified primary composite outcome was functional independence (a score of 0 to 2 on the modified Rankin Scale, which ranges from 0 [no neurologic disability] to 6 [death]) at 90 days and absence of major periprocedural complications (procedure-related serious adverse events, pneumonia, myocardial infarction, cardiogenic acute pulmonary edema, or malignant stroke) at 7 days.ResultsAmong 273 patients evaluable for the primary outcome in the modified intention-to-treat population, 142 (52.0%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 71.6 (13.8) years. The primary outcome occurred in 38 of 135 patients (28.2%) assigned to general anesthesia and in 50 of 138 patients (36.2%) assigned to procedural sedation (absolute difference, 8.1 percentage points; 95% CI, −2.3 to 19.1; P = .15). At 90 days, the rate of patients achieving functional independence was 33.3% (45 of 135) with general anesthesia and 39.1% (54 of 138) with procedural sedation (relative risk, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.86-1.61; P = .32). The rate of patients without major periprocedural complications at 7 days was 65.9% (89 of 135) with general anesthesia and 67.4% (93 of 138) with procedural sedation (relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.86-1.21; P = .80).Conclusions and RelevanceIn patients treated with mechanical thrombectomy for anterior circulation acute ischemic stroke, general anesthesia and procedural sedation were associated with similar rates of functional independence and major periprocedural complications.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03229148
Background Hypotension and blood pressure (BP) variability during endovascular therapy (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to an anterior large vessel occlusion (LVO) is associated with worse outcomes. However, the optimal BP threshold during EVT is still unknown given the lack of randomized controlled evidence. We designed the DETERMINE trial to assess whether an individualized BP management during EVT could achieve better functional outcomes compared to a standard BP management. Methods The DETERMINE trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label, blinded endpoint clinical trial (PROBE design). AIS patients with a proximal anterior LVO are randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to an experimental arm in which mean arterial pressure (MAP) is maintained within 10% of the first MAP measured before EVT, or a control arm in which systolic BP (SBP) is maintained within 140–180 mm Hg until reperfusion is achieved or artery closure in case of EVT failure. The primary outcome is the rate of favorable functional outcomes, defined by a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) between 0 and 2 at 90 days. Secondary outcomes include excellent outcome and ordinal analysis of the mRS at 90 days, early neurological improvement at 24 h (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale), final infarct volume, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage rates, and all-cause mortality at 90 days. Overall, 432 patients will be included. Discussion DETERMINE will assess the clinical relevance of an individualized BP management before reperfusion compared to the one size fits all approach currently recommended by international guidelines. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04352296. Registered on 20th April 2020.
BACKGROUND: Chest injuries are associated with mortality among patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and require multimodal pain management strategies, including regional anesthesia (RA). We conducted a survey to determine the current practices of physicians working in ICUs regarding RA for the management of chest trauma in patients with multiple traumas. METHODS: An online questionnaire was sent to medical doctors (n = 1230) working in French ICUs, using the Société Française d’Anesthésie Réanimation (SFAR) mailing list of its members. The questionnaire addressed 3 categories: general characteristics, practical aspects of RA, and indications and contraindications. RESULTS: Among the 333 respondents (response rate = 27%), 78% and 40% of 156 respondents declared that they would consider using thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) and thoracic paravertebral blockade (TPB), respectively. The main benefits declared for performing RA were the ability to have effective analgesia, a more effective cough, and early rehabilitation. For 70% of the respondents, trauma patients with a theoretical indication of RA did not receive TEA or TPB for the following reasons: the ICU had no experience of RA (62%), no anesthesiologist-intensivist working in the ICU (46%), contraindications (27%), ignorance of the SFAR guidelines (19%), and no RA protocol available (13%). In this survey, 95% of the respondents thought the prognosis of trauma patients could be influenced by the use of RA. CONCLUSIONS: While TEA and TPB are underused because of several limitations related to the patterns of injuries in multitrauma patients, lack of both experience and confidence in combination with the absence of available protocols appear to be the major restraining factors, even if physicians are aware that patients’ outcomes could be improved by RA. These results suggest the need to strengthen initial training and provide continuing education about RA in the ICU.
IntroductionEndovascular thrombectomy is the standard of care for anterior circulation acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) secondary to emergent large vessel occlusion in patients who qualify. General anaesthesia (GA) or conscious sedation (CS) is usually required to ensure patient comfort and avoid agitation and movement during thrombectomy. However, the question of whether the use of GA or CS might influence functional outcome remains debated. Indeed, conflicting results exist between observational studies with better outcomes associated with CS and small monocentric randomised controlled trials favouring GA. Therefore, we aim to evaluate the effect of CS versus GA on functional outcome and periprocedural complications in endovascular mechanical thrombectomy for anterior circulation AIS.Methods and analysisAnesthesia Management in Endovascular Therapy for Ischemic Stroke (AMETIS) trial is an investigator initiated, multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled, two-arm trial. AMETIS trial will randomise 270 patients with anterior circulation AIS in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by centre, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (≤15 or >15) and association of intravenous thrombolysis or not to receive either CS or GA. The primary outcome is a composite of functional independence at 3 months and absence of perioperative complication occurring by day 7 after endovascular therapy for anterior circulation AIS. Functional independence is defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0–2 by day 90. Perioperative complications are defined as intervention-associated arterial perforation or dissection, pneumonia or myocardial infarction or cardiogenic acute pulmonary oedema or malignant stroke evolution occurring by day 7.Ethics and disseminationThe AMETIS trial was approved by an independent ethics committee. Study began in august 2017. Results will be published in an international peer-reviewed medical journal.Trial registration numberNCT03229148.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.