General Versus Locoregional Anesthesia in TEVAR: An NSQIP Analysis

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Local-Regional versus General Anesthesia for Elective Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a minimally invasive treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms. The choice between general anesthesia (GA) and local-regional anesthesia (LRA) may impact outcomes, but evidence remains inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare GA and LRA in elective EVAR, focusing on mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), endoleaks, intensive care unit admissions, and hospital stay (HS). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov included studies from inception to December 2024. Observational studies meeting predefined criteria were analyzed using a fixed-effects model in R, and evidence certainty was assessed using the GRADE framework. This work was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024547446). Seventeen studies with 91,560 patients were included. LRA was associated with reduced mortality (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.59-0.97), lower MACE (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.61-0.90), fewer intensive care unit admissions (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.73-0.81), fewer type 1 endoleaks (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.72-0.97), fewer type 2 endoleaks (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.57-0.70), and shorter HS (-0.38 days; 95% CI -0.46 to -0.30). Sensitivity analyses confirmed most results, but mortality lost significance in some cases. The certainty of evidence ranged from low to very low due to some inconsistencies in studies. LRA may offer better outcomes than GA in elective EVAR, including lower mortality, MACE, and shorter HS. However, further randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings and guide clinical practice.

Total Aortic Arch Repair With Double-Fenestrated Physician-Modified Endograft Under Local Anesthesia And Sedation: A Prospective Study

CLINICAL IMPACT

The outcomes of local anesthesia and sedation (also referred to as monitored anesthesia care) in endovascular aortic arch repair are not well-studied or widely reported. This study aims to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of this approach using physician-modified endografts for total aortic arch repair and showing it is a promising alternative to general anesthesia. Only a few exclusion criteria necessitate performing the procedure under general anesthesia and no conversions to general anesthesia were required.

In Patients with Heart Failure Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy, Locoregional Anesthesia is Not Associated with Decreased Mortality, Stroke, or Myocardial Infarction Compared to General Anesthesia

BACKGROUND

While existing literature reports no benefit of locoregional anesthesia (LRA) over general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA), the effect of LRA on patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) has not been explored. This study aims to assess whether the choice of anesthesia plays a role in influencing outcomes within this population.

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) files between 2005 and 2022 and the procedural targeted ACS-NSQIP database for CEA between 2011-2022, all patients receiving CEA were identified, and the subset of patients with CHF was included. Patient characteristics and 30-day outcomes were compared using χ2 or Fischer's exact test as appropriate for categorical variables and the independent t-test or Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate for continuous variables. Mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were compared between patients receiving GA and LRA using univariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 3,040 patients (2,733 undergoing GA, 307 undergoing LRA) with a diagnosis of CHF undergoing CEA were identified. No difference in mortality (GA 3.1% vs. LRA 4.6%, P = 0.162), MI (GA 3.0% vs. LRA 2.3%, P = 0.478), stroke (2.4% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.805) or MACE (GA 7.4% vs. LRA 8.1%, P = 0.654) was observed. LRA patients had a significantly lower hospital stay compared to GA patients (1 day [interquartile range (IQR) 1-3] vs. 2 days [IQR 1-4], P < 0.001). Shunt was more commonly used in patients receiving GA (32.9% vs. 12.5%, P < 0.001) compared to LRA.

CONCLUSIONS

While utilizing LRA compared to GA during CEA in patients with CHF is associated with a shorter hospital stay and less intraoperative shunting, the choice of anesthesia did not impact the outcomes of mortality, MI or stroke. Further research is needed to determine the effect of LRA on the outcomes of CEA among patients with different stages of heart failure.

How Would I Treat My Own Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Perioperative Considerations From the Anesthesiologist Perspective

A thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) can be potentially life-threatening due to its associated risk of rupture. Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair, performed as endovascular repair and/or open surgery, is the recommended therapy of choice. Hemodynamic instability, severe blood loss, and spinal cord or cerebral ischemia are some potential hazards the perioperative team has to face during these procedures. Therefore, preoperative risk assessment and intraoperative anesthesia management addressing these potential hazards are essential to improving patients' outcomes. Based on a presented index case, an overview focusing on anesthetic measures to identify perioperatively and manage these risks in TAAA repair is provided.

The effect of obesity on the outcome of thoracic endovascular aortic repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Obesity is a well-known predictor for poor postoperative outcomes of vascular surgery. However, the association between obesity and outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is still unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the roles of obesity in the outcomes of TEVAR.

Methods

We systematically searched the Web of Science and PubMed databases to obtain articles regarding obesity and TEVAR that were published before July 2023. The odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) was used to assess the effect of obesity on TEVAR outcomes. Body mass index (BMI) was also compared between patients experiencing adverse events after TEVAR and those not experiencing adverse events. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of the enrolled studies.

Results

A total of 7,849 patients from 10 studies were included. All enrolled studies were high-quality. Overall, the risk of overall mortality (OR = 1.49, 95% CI [1.02-2.17], p = 0.04) was increased in obese patients receiving TEVAR. However, the associations between obesity and overall complications (OR = 2.41, 95% CI [0.84-6.93], p = 0.10) and specific complications were all insignificant, including stroke (OR = 1.39, 95% CI [0.56-3.45], p = 0.48), spinal ischemia (OR = 0.97, 95% CI [0.64-1.47], p = 0.89), neurological complications (OR = 0.13, 95% CI [0.01-2.37], p = 0.17), endoleaks (OR = 1.02, 95% CI [0.46-2.29], p = 0.96), wound complications (OR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.28-2.96], p = 0.88), and renal failure (OR = 2.98, 95% CI [0.92-9.69], p = 0.07). In addition, the patients who suffered from postoperative overall complications (p < 0.001) and acute kidney injury (p = 0.006) were found to have a higher BMI. In conclusion, obesity is closely associated with higher risk of mortality after TEVAR. However, TEVAR may still be suitable for obese patients. Physicians should pay more attention to the perioperative management of obese patients.

How We Would Treat Our Own Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm

This manuscript is intended to provide a comprehensive review of the current state of knowledge on endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). The management of these complex aneurysms requires an interdisciplinary and patient-specific approach in high-volume centers. An index case is used to discuss the diagnosis and treatment of a patient undergoing fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair for a TAAA.