RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Literature shows differences in pain experiences between sexes. The exact influence of thermal liver ablation on experienced pain is still not well-known. This study aims to investigate the maximum pain intensity at the recovery between men and women after percutaneous thermal liver ablation. METHODS: Patients treated with percutaneous thermal liver ablation (radiofrequency or microwave ablation) in Maastricht University Medical Center + between 2018 and 2022 for primary or secondary liver tumors were included retrospectively. Outcomes included maximum numerical rating scale (NRS, scale:0-10) score at the recovery room, prevalence of post-procedural pain (defined as NRS score ≥ 4), duration of anesthesia, length of stay at recovery, and complications. Regression analyses were adjusted for age, ASA-score, BMI, tumor type, maximum diameter of lesion, chronic pain in patients' history, and history of psychological disorder. RESULTS: 183 patients were included of which 123 men (67%). Results showed higher average maximum NRS scores in women patients compared to men (mean:3.88 versus 2.73), but not after adjustments (aß:0.75, 95%CI:-0.13-1.64). Women suffered more from acute post-procedural pain (59% versus 35%; aOR:2.50, 95%CI:1.16-5.39), and needed analgesics more often at the recovery room (aOR:2.43, 95%CI:1.07-5.48) compared to men. NRS score at recovery arrival did not significantly differ (aß:0.37, 95%CI:-0.48-1.22). No differences were seen in the length of stay at the recovery, duration of anesthesia, procedure time, and complication rate. Location of the tumor (subcapsular or deep), total tumors per patient, and distinction between primary and secondary tumors had no influence on the NRS. CONCLUSION: This retrospective single-center study shows higher post-procedural pain rates after thermal liver ablation in women, resulting in higher analgesics use at the recovery room. The results suggest considering higher dosage of analgesics during thermal liver ablation in women to reduce post-procedural pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 3: Non-controlled retrospective cohort study.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Direct aspiration during endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients is safe and effective. The 'Soft torqueable catheter Optimized For Intracranial Access' (Sofia) catheter is commonly used. Data on differences between 5Fr and 6Fr Sofia is limited. Hence, we aimed to compare the clinical, technical, and safety outcomes between both Sofia catheters in AIS patients. METHODS: Patients with an intracranial anterior circulation occlusion from the 'Maastricht Stroke Quality-registry' (MaSQ-registry), who underwent EVT for AIS from September 2020 to February 2023, and treated with the Sofia catheter in the first-line technique were included. Outcomes included a shift on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days, favorable functional outcome (mRS 0-2), first-attempt recanalization rate, and per procedural complications. Multivariable regression analyses were performed with adjustments. RESULTS: Out of 511 registered patients in the MaSQ-registry, 366 patients were included. 281 patients (77 %) were treated with the Sofia 6Fr. No shift towards better outcomes on the ordinal mRS score at 90 days was observed in the Sofia 6Fr group compared to the 5Fr (adjusted common[ac] OR:1.34, 95 %CI:0.70-2.56). Favorable functional outcome (aOR:1.24, 95 %CI:0.49-3.13), and per procedural complications (aOR:1.04, 95 %CI:0.41-2.64) did not differ significantly between Sofia 6Fr and 5Fr. The Sofia 6Fr achieved higher first-attempt successful recanalization rates (53 % versus 34 %; aOR:2.28, 95 %CI:1.11-4.69), and lower total thrombectomy attempts (median:1 versus 2; aß:-0.63, 95 %CI:-1.21 to -0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of 6Fr Sofia aspiration catheter leads in this single-center registry to higher first-attempt successful recanalization rates and fewer thrombectomy attempts compared to the 5Fr Sofia catheter. However, this did not reflect in better clinical outcomes.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Balloon guide catheters (BGCs) are used in endovascular treatment (EVT) for ischemic stroke. Previous literature did not distinguish between BGC use with and without inflated balloon. This study aims to compare outcomes between non-BCG and BGC use with and without inflated balloon during EVT. METHODS: Patients who underwent EVT for anterior circulation ischemic stroke between September 2020 and February 2023 were analyzed. Patients were divided into three groups: non-BGC, BGC with inflated balloon, or BGC without inflated balloon. The primary outcome was the ordinal modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90-day follow-up. Secondary outcomes included expanded Thrombolysis In Cerebral Ischemia score (eTICI) and periprocedural complications. Regression analyses with BGC with inflated balloon as comparator were performed with adjustments. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on first-line thrombectomy technique. RESULTS: Out of 511 patients, 428 patients were included. Compared to BCG with inflated balloon, the mRS at 90 days did not differ in the group without inflated balloon (adjusted common [ac]OR: 1.07, 95%CI 0.67-1.73) or non-BGC (acOR: 1.42, 95%CI 0.83-2.42). Compared to patients treated with a BGC with inflated balloon, those treated with BGC without inflated balloon had lower eTICI scores (acOR: 0.59, 95%CI 0.37-0.94), and patients treated with non-BGC had lower chances of periprocedural complications (aOR: 0.41, 95%CI 0.20-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows no clinical differences in ischemic stroke patients treated with BGC with inflated balloon compared to non-BGC and BGC without inflated balloon, despite lower periprocedural complication rates in the non-BGC group and lower eTICI scores in the BGC without inflated balloon group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3, non-controlled retrospective cohort study.