Blood Pressure During Endovascular Treatment Under Conscious Sedation or Local Anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of blood pressure (BP) as mediator of the effect of conscious sedation (CS) compared to local anesthesia (LA) on functional outcome after endovascular treatment (EVT). METHODS: Patients treated in the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) Registry centers with CS or LA as preferred anesthetic approach during EVT for ischemic stroke were analyzed. First, we evaluated the effect of CS on area under the threshold (AUT), relative difference between baseline and lowest procedural mean arterial pressure (∆LMAP), and procedural BP trend, compared to LA. Second, we assessed the association between BP and functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS]) with multivariable regression. Lastly, we evaluated whether BP explained the effect of CS on mRS. RESULTS: In 440 patients with available BP data, patients treated under CS (n = 262) had larger AUTs (median 228 vs 23 mm Hg*min), larger ∆LMAP (median 16% vs 6%), and a more negative BP trend (-0.22 vs -0.08 mm Hg/min) compared to LA (n = 178). Larger ∆LMAP and AUTs were associated with worse mRS (adjusted common odds ratio [acOR] per 10% drop 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.97, and acOR per 300 mm Hg*min 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97). Patients treated under CS had worse mRS compared to LA (acOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.87) and this association remained when adjusting for ∆LMAP and AUT (acOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Large BP drops are associated with worse functional outcome. However, BP drops do not explain the worse outcomes in the CS group.

Dexmedetomidine as a Sedative in the Awake Implantation of a Neuromodulative System.

OBJECTIVE: During implantation of a neuromodulative system, high patient satisfaction is closely associated with the equilibrium between an effective analgesia and sedation regimen, and the possibility for the patient to be awake and cooperative during procedure. This study assessed the efficacy of the sedative dexmedetomidine to achieve this balance, with patient satisfaction as the primary outcome. METHODS: Ten patients undergoing implantation of a dorsal column and dorsal root ganglion stimulator received dexmedetomidine (1 mcg/kg over 10 minutes, followed by 0.6 mcg/kg/hour) in combination with remifentanil at a set dose (3 mcg/kg/hour). Sedation was titrated to a Ramsay Sedation Score of 3. Recorded were as follows: patient satisfaction score, patient comfort score, operator comfort score, pain score, rescue medication and number of adjustments of dexmedetomidine intra-operatively, as well as sedation level, hemodynamic (blood pressure and heart rate), and respiratory characteristics (SpO2 ). RESULTS: Scores were high on patient satisfaction (median 8.5; IQR 2.0), patient comfort (3.0; IQR 1.25), and operator comfort (4.0; IQR 1.0). In all patients, intra-operative heart rate and mean arterial pressure were lower compared with baseline values. No respiratory depression or other complications related to anesthesia were reported. Moments of incident pain were effectively treated in 6 patients requiring an extra bolus of remifentanil. CONCLUSION: In this study group, dexmedetomidine combined with remifentanil provided a high level of patient satisfaction and comfort, as well as operator comfort, without any clinically relevant adverse events. All patients were highly cooperative and instructable; incident pain needs to be closely monitored.