Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
J Vasc Surg ; 74(4): 1281-1289, 2021 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33887427

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have shown no differences in the outcomes of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) performed with general anesthesia (GA) vs local or regional anesthesia (LRA). To date, no study has specifically compared the outcomes of TCAR to those of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) stratified by anesthetic type. The aim of the present study was to identify the effect of the anesthetic type on the outcomes of TCAR vs CEA. METHODS: Patients undergoing CEA and TCAR for carotid artery stenosis from 2016 to 2019 in the Vascular Quality Initiative were included. We excluded patients who had undergone concomitant procedures, patients with more than two stented lesions, and patients who had undergone the procedure for a nonatherosclerotic indication. Propensity score matching was performed between the two procedures stratified by the anesthetic type for age, sex, race, presenting symptoms, major comorbidities (ie, hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease), previous coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous transluminal coronary intervention, previous CEA or carotid artery stenting, degree of ipsilateral stenosis, the presence of contralateral occlusion, and preoperative medications. Intergroup differences between the treatment groups and differences in the perioperative outcomes were tested using the McNemar test for categorical variables and the paired t test or Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test for continuous variables, as appropriate. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated as the ratio of the probability of the outcome event for the patients treated within each treatment group. RESULTS: A total of 65,337 patients were included. Of the 65,337 patients, 59,664 had undergone carotid revascularization under GA (91%). When performed with LRA, TCAR and CEA had similar rates of stroke, death, and MI. However, when performed with GA, patients undergoing TCAR had a 50% decreased risk of MI compared with those undergoing CEA under GA (0.5% vs 1.0%; RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32-0.80; P < .01). When stratified by symptomatic status, patients undergoing TCAR with GA for symptomatic carotid disease had a 67% decreased risk of MI compared with those undergoing CEA with GA for symptomatic disease (0.4% vs 1.2%; RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15-0.75; P < .01). In contrast, no difference was found in the risk of MI between patients undergoing CEA vs TCAR for asymptomatic carotid disease (0.6% vs 0.9%; RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.37-1.14; P = .13). CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present study have confirmed previous studies suggesting that TCAR confers a lower risk of MI compared with CEA. However, our findings demonstrated no differences in the MI rates between TCAR and CEA when performed with LRA. Patients undergoing TCAR under GA had lower rates of MI compared with patients undergoing CEA under GA. When stratified by symptomatic status, the benefit of TCAR persisted only for the symptomatic patients.


Asunto(s)
Anestesia General , Anestesia Local , Estenosis Carotídea/cirugía , Endarterectomía Carotidea , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Infarto del Miocardio/prevención & control , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anestesia General/efectos adversos , Anestesia General/mortalidad , Anestesia Local/efectos adversos , Anestesia Local/mortalidad , Estenosis Carotídea/diagnóstico por imagen , Estenosis Carotídea/mortalidad , Bases de Datos Factuales , Endarterectomía Carotidea/efectos adversos , Endarterectomía Carotidea/mortalidad , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/mortalidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Infarto del Miocardio/diagnóstico , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Infarto del Miocardio/mortalidad , Factores Protectores , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 68: 67-75, 2020 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32504791

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Brachiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas (BCFs) are commonly placed in outpatient settings. The impact of general anesthesia (GA), regional anesthesia (RA), or local anesthesia (LA) on perioperative recovery and fistula maturation/patency after outpatient BCF creations is unknown. We evaluated whether outcomes of outpatient BCF creations vary based on anesthesia modality. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative (2011-2018) national database was queried for outpatient BCF creations. Anesthesia modalities included GA, RA, and LA. Perioperative, 3-month, and 1-year outcomes were compared between GA versus RA/LA anesthesia types. RESULTS: Among 3,527 outpatient BCF creations, anesthesia types were GA in 1,043 (29.6%), RA in 1,150 (32.6%), and LA in 1,334 (37.8%). Patients receiving GA were more often younger, obese, Medicaid recipients, without coronary artery disease, and treated in non-office-based settings (P < 0.05 for all). GA compared with RA/LA cohorts were more often admitted postoperatively (5.3% vs. 2.4%, P < 0.001) but had similar rates of thirty-day mortality (0.9 vs. 0.6%, P = 0.39). 3-month access utilization for hemodialysis was lower in GA than in RA/LA cohorts (12.6% vs. 23.6%, P < 0.001). The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that GA and RA/LA cohorts had similar 1-year primary access occlusion-free survival (43.6% vs. 47.1%, P = 0.24) and endovascular/open reintervention-free survival (57.2% vs. 57.6%, P = 0.98). On multivariable analysis, GA compared with RA/LA use was independently associated with increased postoperative admission (odds ratio [OR]: 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-2.67, P = 0.02) and decreased 3-month access utilization (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.25-0.61, P < 0.001) but had similar 1-year access occlusion (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.9-1.32, P = 0.36) and reintervention (HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.82-1.26, P = 0.88). On subgroup analysis of the RA/LA cohort, RA compared with LA was associated with increased 3-month access utilization (OR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.01-2.5; P = 0.04) and 1-year access reintervention (HR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.12-1.89), but had similar 1-year access occlusion (HR: 1.2, 95% CI: 0.95-1.51, P = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with RA/LA use, GA use in patients undergoing outpatient BCF creations was associated with increased hospital admissions, decreased access utilization at 3 months, and similar 1-year access occlusion and reintervention. RA/LA is preferable to expedite recovery and access utilization.


Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios , Anestesia de Conducción , Anestesia General , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica , Diálisis Renal , Extremidad Superior/irrigación sanguínea , Anciano , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios/efectos adversos , Anestesia de Conducción/efectos adversos , Anestesia General/efectos adversos , Anestesia Local/efectos adversos , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/efectos adversos , Canadá , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular
3.
J Vasc Surg ; 71(6): 1964-1971, 2020 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31699512

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Although the choice of anesthesia during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) does not seem to increase the risk of perioperative stroke, it might affect the outcomes of shunting during CEA. This study aims to evaluate whether the choice of anesthesia modifies the association between shunting and in-hospital stroke/death after CEA. METHODS: We retrospective reviewed all CEA cases performed between 2003 and 2017 in the Vascular Quality Initiative. Patients were divided into three groups: (1) no shunting during CEA (n = 29,227 [48.4%]), (2) routine shunting (n = 28,673 [47.5%]), and (3) selective shunting based on an intraoperative indication (n = 2499 [4.1%]). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to study the interaction between anesthesia (local anesthesia [LA]/regional anesthesia [RA] vs general anesthesia [GA]) and intraoperative shunting (no shunting vs routine and selective shunting) during CEA in predicting the risk of in-hospital stroke/death after CEA. RESULTS: The final cohort included 60,399 patients. The majority of CEA cases (90.2%) were performed under GA. Of the study cohort, 29,227 (48.4%) underwent CEA without shunting, 28,673 patients (47.5%) had routine shunting, and the remaining (n = 2499 [4.1%]) were selectively shunted. The interaction between intraoperative shunting and anesthesia in predicting in-hospital stroke/death was statistically significant (P < .05). When CEA is performed under LA/GA, routine shunting was associated with 3.5 times the adjusted odds of in-hospital stroke/death after CEA (odds ratio [OR], 3.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-6.8; P < .001) compared with no shunting, whereas selective shunting was associated with 7.1 the odds (OR, 7.1; 95% CI, 3.5-14.7; P < .001). In contrast, under GA, there was no significant association between routine shunting and in-hospital stroke/death (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.5; P = .12), whereas selective shunting was associated with 1.7 times the odds (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.4; P < .01) compared with not performing shunting during CEA. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LA/RA is associated with increased odds of stroke/death compared with GA when intraoperative shunting is performed. The effect of anesthesia is more pronounced in patients who develop clamp-related ischemia and undergo selective shunting. More controlled studies are needed to explain these findings and validate them.


Asunto(s)
Anestesia General , Anestesia Local , Estenosis Carotídea/cirugía , Circulación Cerebrovascular , Endarterectomía Carotidea , Anciano , Anestesia General/efectos adversos , Anestesia General/mortalidad , Anestesia Local/efectos adversos , Anestesia Local/mortalidad , Canadá , Estenosis Carotídea/diagnóstico por imagen , Estenosis Carotídea/mortalidad , Estenosis Carotídea/fisiopatología , Endarterectomía Carotidea/efectos adversos , Endarterectomía Carotidea/mortalidad , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sistema de Registros , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular/mortalidad , Accidente Cerebrovascular/fisiopatología , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos
4.
Stroke ; 50(12): 3439-3448, 2019 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31735137

RESUMEN

Background and Purpose- This analysis was performed to assess the association between perioperative and clinical variables and the 30-day risk of stroke or death after carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. Methods- Individual patient-level data from the 5 largest randomized controlled carotid trials were pooled in the Carotid Stenosis Trialists' Collaboration database. A total of 4181 patients who received carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic stenosis per protocol were included. Determinants of outcome included carotid endarterectomy technique, type of anesthesia, intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring, shunting, antiplatelet medication, and clinical variables. Stroke or death within 30 days after carotid endarterectomy was the primary outcome. Adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) were estimated in multilevel multivariable analyses using a Poisson regression model. Results- Mean age was 69.5±9.2 years (70.7% men). The 30-day stroke or death rate was 4.3%. In the multivariable regression analysis, local anesthesia was associated with a lower primary outcome rate (versus general anesthesia; aRR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.50-0.99]). Shunting (aRR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.05-1.95]), a contralateral high-grade carotid stenosis or occlusion (aRR, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.02-2.47]), and a more severe neurological deficit (mRS, 3-5 versus 0-2: aRR, 2.51 [95% CI, 1.30-4.83]) were associated with higher primary outcome rates. None of the other characteristics were significantly associated with the perioperative stroke or death risk. Conclusions- The current results indicate lower perioperative stroke or death rates in patients operated upon under local anesthesia, whereas a more severe neurological deficit and a contralateral high-grade carotid stenosis or occlusion were identified as potential risk factors. Despite a possible selection bias and patients not having been randomized, these findings might be useful to guide surgeons and anesthetists when treating patients with symptomatic carotid disease.


Asunto(s)
Estenosis Carotídea/cirugía , Endarterectomía Carotidea/efectos adversos , Endarterectomía Carotidea/métodos , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Anciano , Anestesia General/efectos adversos , Anestesia Local , Endarterectomía Carotidea/mortalidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Factores de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología
5.
J Vasc Surg ; 69(5): 1461-1470.e4, 2019 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31010512

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Several prior studies have shown lower risk of myocardial infarction (MI) in carotid artery stenting (CAS) compared with carotid endarterectomy. This is likely because the majority of endarterectomies are performed under general anesthesia (GA), whereas CAS is mainly performed under local anesthesia (LA). Performing CAS under GA may reverse its minimally invasive benefits. The aim of this study was to compare the safety profile of CAS-GA with that of CAS-LA. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the Vascular Quality Initiative database from 2005 to 2017 was performed. Primary outcomes included major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of in-hospital death and MI, and postoperative neurologic events. Multivariable logistic models, and coarsened exact matching were used to evaluate the association between the primary outcomes and anesthesia technique. RESULTS: Of 12,919 CAS cases performed, 2024 (15.7%) were under GA. Comparing CAS-GA with CAS-LA in the overall cohort, CAS-GA had significantly higher crude rates of in-hospital mortality (2.1% vs 0.5%), MI (1.3% vs 0.7%), composite MACE (3.1% vs 1.2%), and ipsilateral stroke (2.3% vs 1.6%). Patients undergoing CAS-GA also had higher rates of dysrhythmia (3.0% vs 2.2%), acute congestive heart failure (1.6% vs 0.7%) and perioperative hypertension (13.2% vs 9.4%), and were more likely to have a length of hospital stay of more than 4 days (prolonged length of stay) (17.6% vs 8.5%) compared with those undergoing CAS-LA. On multivariable analysis, CAS-GA had a 2.3 times higher odds of in-hospital mortality compared with CAS-LA (OR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.26-5.03), a 1.9 times the odds of MACE (OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.15-3.03), and a 2.3 times the odds of acute congestive heart failure (OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.26-4.15; all P < .05). In addition, these patients had a 43% higher odds of developing perioperative hypertension (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.09-1.87; P = .01) and almost 2 times the odds of a prolonged length of stay (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.41-2.35; P < .001). The adjusted odds of stroke, dysrhythmia and reperfusion syndrome were not significantly different between the two groups. Additional analysis using coarsened exact matching showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the established increase risk of perioperative stroke/death with CAS compared with carotid endarterectomy, performing it under GA seems to be associated with increased cardiac complications, length of stay, and consequently hospitalization costs. Pending future data from prospective, randomized, controlled trials to validate our findings, there is evidence to suggest that it may be better to perform CAS under LA, especially in medically high-risk patients.


Asunto(s)
Anestesia General , Anestesia Local , Enfermedades de las Arterias Carótidas/terapia , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Stents , Anciano , Anestesia General/efectos adversos , Anestesia General/mortalidad , Anestesia Local/efectos adversos , Anestesia Local/mortalidad , Enfermedades de las Arterias Carótidas/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedades de las Arterias Carótidas/mortalidad , Trastornos Cerebrovasculares/etiología , Trastornos Cerebrovasculares/mortalidad , Bases de Datos Factuales , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/mortalidad , Femenino , Cardiopatías/etiología , Cardiopatías/mortalidad , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
6.
J Vasc Surg ; 69(3): 890-897.e5, 2019 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30798844

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Despite recent reports of improved patency with regional anesthesia (RA), general anesthesia (GA) remains the most common choice for anesthesia for patients undergoing arteriovenous fistula (AVF) or arteriovenous graft (AVG) creation, with nearly 85% utilization. Previous studies of the effect of anesthesia type on outcomes have been conducted through single institutions or a national database with poor granularity for vascular-specific data. Given the high variability of practice patterns and the high prevalence of end-stage renal disease requiring access creation, further study of the impact of anesthesia choice during AVF or AVG creation is warranted. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative hemodialysis data set was queried to identify patients undergoing AVF or AVG creation between 2011 and 2017. Patients were grouped according to access type and anesthesia method (GA vs local anesthesia/RA). The primary outcome was early access failure within 120 days. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital and 30-day complications, including steal, swelling, hemorrhage, and wound infection. RESULTS: There were 31,028 patients undergoing AVG (6961) or AVF (24,067) identified. Compared with patients with GA, patients undergoing access creation with RA had higher early failure rates (AVG, 26.2% vs 23%; AVF, 22.3% vs 20.6%; both P = .04). However, in the GA group undergoing AVF creation, there was a 26% increase (adjusted odds ratio, 1.26 [1.06-1.55]) in bleeding complications and a 3.4-fold increase (adjusted odds ratio, 3.43 [1.38-8.51]) in wound infection rates. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas it is traditionally performed under GA, hemodialysis access with fistula or graft creation is increasingly being performed under RA. In our analysis, rates of perioperative complications, including infection and bleeding, may be lessened by using RA, especially among patients undergoing AVF creation. However, this was accompanied by a 3.2% absolute (21% relative) increased risk of early failure within the first 120 days after dialysis creation among patients undergoing AVG.


Asunto(s)
Anestesia General/efectos adversos , Anestesia Local/efectos adversos , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Diálisis Renal , Anciano , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/etiología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/fisiopatología , Hemorragia Posoperatoria/etiología , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/etiología , Factores de Tiempo , Insuficiencia del Tratamiento , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular
7.
J Vasc Surg ; 67(5): 1419-1428, 2018 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29242070

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Studies on the safety of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) under different anesthetic techniques are sometimes contradictory. The aim of this study was to compare real-world outcomes of CEA under general anesthesia (GA) vs regional or local anesthesia (RA/LA). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the Vascular Quality Initiative database (2003-2017) was performed. Primary outcomes included perioperative stroke, death, and myocardial infarction (MI) occurring during the hospital stay. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used. To minimize selection bias and to evaluate comparable groups, patients were matched on baseline variables using coarsened exact matching. RESULTS: Of 75,319 CEA cases, 6684 (8.9%) were performed under RA/LA. These patients were more likely to be older (median age, 72 vs 71 years) and male (62.5% vs 60.2%), with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class (class 3-5, 94.2% vs 93.0%) than those undergoing CEA-GA (all P < .001). CEA-GA had higher crude rates of in-hospital cardiac outcomes including MI mainly diagnosed clinically or on electrocardiography (0.5% vs 0.2%; P = .01), dysrhythmia (1.6% vs 1.2%; P < .001), acute congestive heart failure (CHF; 0.5% vs 0.2%; P < .001), and hemodynamic instability (27.0% vs 20.0%; P < .001) compared with CEA-RA/LA. No difference in perioperative stroke or death was seen between the two groups. On multivariate analysis, CEA-GA was associated with twice the odds of in-hospital MI (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-3.59; P = .03), 4 times the odds of acute CHF (aOR, 3.92; 95% CI, 1.84-8.34; P < .001), and 1.5 times the odds of hemodynamic instability (aOR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.44-1.66; P < .001). Patients undergoing CEA-GA had 1.8 times the odds of staying in the hospital for >1 day (aOR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.67-1.93; P < .001). Coarsened exact matching confirmed our results. Risk factors associated with increased cardiac complications (MI and CHF) under GA included female gender, increased age, Medicaid insurance, history of smoking, medical comorbidities (such as hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, and CHF), prior ipsilateral carotid intervention, and urgent/emergent procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing CEA under GA have higher odds of postoperative MI, acute CHF, and hemodynamic instability compared with those undergoing CEA under RA/LA. They are also more likely to stay in the hospital for >1 day. However, the overall risk of cardiac adverse events after CEA was low, which made the differences clinically irrelevant. The choice of anesthesia approach to CEA should be driven by the team's experience and the patient's risk factors and preference.


Asunto(s)
Anestesia de Conducción , Anestesia General , Anestesia Local , Enfermedades de las Arterias Carótidas/cirugía , Endarterectomía Carotidea , Anciano , Anestesia de Conducción/efectos adversos , Anestesia de Conducción/mortalidad , Anestesia General/efectos adversos , Anestesia General/mortalidad , Anestesia Local/efectos adversos , Anestesia Local/mortalidad , Enfermedades de las Arterias Carótidas/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedades de las Arterias Carótidas/mortalidad , Enfermedades de las Arterias Carótidas/fisiopatología , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Bases de Datos Factuales , Endarterectomía Carotidea/efectos adversos , Endarterectomía Carotidea/mortalidad , Femenino , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/etiología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Hemodinámica , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Infarto del Miocardio/fisiopatología , Oportunidad Relativa , Puntaje de Propensión , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/fisiopatología , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA