Comparison between remimazolam and propofol anaesthesia for interventional neuroradiology: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

General anaesthesia can immobile patients during interventional neuroradiology to improve image quality. Remimazolam, an ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine, is advantageous for haemodynamic stability. This study compared remimazolam and propofol anaesthesia during neuroradiology procedures regarding intraoperative hypotensive events and rapid recovery.

METHODS

This single-masked randomised-controlled study included 76 participants who underwent elective endovascular embolisation in a single centre. Patients were randomised between a continuous remimazolam infusion (n = 38) or a target-controlled propofol infusion group (n = 38). In the remimazolam group, flumazenil (0.2 mg) was administered at the end of the procedure. Phenylephrine was titrated to maintain the mean arterial pressure within ± 20% of the baseline value. The primary outcome was the total phenylephrine dose during the procedure.

RESULTS

The total phenylephrine dose was 0.0 [0.0-30.0] μg in the remimazolam group and 30.0 [0.0-205.0] μg in the propofol group (p = 0.001). Hypotensive events were observed in 11 (28.9%) patients in the remimazolam group and 23 (60.5%) patients in the propofol group (p = 0.001). Recovery times to spontaneous breathing, eye-opening, extubation, and orientation were shorter in the remimazolam group than in the propofol group (all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Remimazolam anaesthesia showed superior haemodynamic stability compared with propofol anaesthesia during neuroradiology procedures. Systematic use of flumazenil enabled rapid recovery from remimazolam anaesthesia.

REGISTRATION

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry; Registration number: UMIN000047384; URL: https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000054046.

Volume embolization ratio of coiled cerebral aneurysms, does awake technique affect the results?

Background

Despite the great innovations in the neuroendovascular techniques and related materials, there are still notable percentages of recurrent cerebral aneurysms after aneurysm coiling. Aneurysm packing density is well known to affect the initial angiographic result of aneurysm embolization and has a crucial role in the stability of aneurysm obliteration. Although aneurysm coiling is commonly performed under general anesthesia, it could be performed under local anesthesia in certain circumstances.

Objective

The purpose of this study is to compare the volume embolization ratio (VER) and angiographic results of cerebral aneurysm embolization performed under local and general anesthesia.

Materials and methods

This is a retrospective cohort analysis of 20 consecutive cases of coiled cerebral aneurysms that were coiled under LA. Further, 15 cerebral aneurysm coil embolization cases have been collected from our data as matched control group.

Results

Embolization was performed under local anesthesia (Group A) in 20 patients (57.1%) and under general anesthesia (Group B) in 15 patients (42.9%). At the end of the procedure, control angiogram revealed complete obliteration in 13 patients (37.1%), while incomplete obliteration was detected in 22 patients (62.9%). The mean VER 27.9 ± 11.8 without a significant difference between both groups of the study as the VER of Group (A) was 26.05 ± 8.4 and that of Group B was 30.44 ± 15.2. Follow-up angiography at 1 year revealed complete obliteration in 17 (48.6%) of the coiled aneurysms, while incomplete obliteration was detected in 18 patients (51.4%).

Conclusions

Endovascular coiling of cerebral aneurysms under local anesthesia is a safe and feasible procedure without significant effects on the VER.

Comparison of neostigmine and sugammadex for hemodynamic parameters in neurointerventional anesthesia

Introduction

Hemodynamic stability is important during neurointerventional procedures. However, ICP or blood pressure may increase due to endotracheal extubation. The aim of this study was to compare the hemodynamic effects of sugammadex and neostigmine with atropine in neurointerventional procedures during emergence from anesthesia.

Methods

Patients undergoing neurointerventional procedures were allocated to the sugammadex group (Group S) and the neostigmine group (Group N). Group S was administered IV 2 mg/kg sugammadex when a train-of-four (TOF) count of 2 was present, and Group N was administered neostigmine 50 mcg/kg with atropine 0.2 mg/kg at a TOF count of 2. We recorded heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean blood pressure (MAP), and peripheral arterial oxygen saturation during administration of the reverse agent and at 2, 5, 10, 15, 30, 120 min, and 24 h thereafter. The primary outcome was blood pressure and heart rate change after the reversal agent was given. The secondary outcomes were systolic blood pressure variability standard deviation (a measure of the amount of variation or dispersion of a set of values), systolic blood pressure variability-successive variation (square root of the average squared difference between successive blood pressure measurements), nicardipine use, time-to-TOF ratio ≥0.9 after the administration of reversal agent, and time from the administration of the reversal agent to tracheal extubation.

Results

A total of 31 patients were randomized to sugammadex, and 30 patients were randomized to neostigmine. Except for anesthesia time, there were no significant differences in any of the clinical characteristics between the two groups. The results demonstrated that the increase in MAP from period A to B was significantly greater in Group N than in Group S (regression coefficient = -10, 95% confidence interval = -17.3 to -2.7, P = 0.007). The MAP level was significantly increased from period A to B in the neostigmine group (95.1 vs. 102.4 mm Hg, P = 0.015), but it was not altered in Group S. In contrast, the change in HR from periods A to B was not significantly different between groups.

Conclusion

We suggest that sugammadex is a better option than neostigmine in interventional neuroradiological procedures due to the shorter extubation time and more stable hemodynamic change during emergence.

Anesthesia care in the interventional neuroradiology suite: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The scope of procedures conducted by neurointerventionalists is expanding quickly, with lacking consensus over the best anesthesia modality. Although the procedures involve all age groups, the interventions may be complex and lengthy and may be provided in hospitals currently not yet familiar with the field. Here we review current literature addressing elective outpatient neurointerventional procedures and aim to provide an update on the management of intervention-specific crises, address special patient populations, and provide key learning points for everyday use in the neurointerventional radiology suite.

RECENT FINDINGS

Various studies have compared the use of different anesthesia modalities and preinterventional and postinterventional care. Monitored anesthesia care is generally recommended for elderly patients, whereas children are preferably treated with general anesthesia. Additional local anesthesia is beneficial for procedures, such as percutaneous kyphoplasty and vascular access.

SUMMARY

Combining different anesthetic modalities is a valuable approach in the neurointerventional radiology suite. More interventional and patient population-specific studies are needed to improve evidence-based perioperative management.

Airway management in general anesthesia for endovascular treatment of cerebral arteriovenous malformation: a retrospective observational study

Background and objective

This retrospective and observational study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the use of the endotracheal tube (ETT) and the Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) for the airway management with respect to airway safety, hemodynamic stability, adverse respiratory events, and recovery characteristics in patients who underwent endovascular treatment (EVT) for cerebrovascular arteriovenous malformation under general anesthesia between 2011 and 2018.

Methods

The study included data from the patient's electronic medical records and anesthesia files. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of hemodynamic disturbances and respiratory adverse events during airway management. The secondary outcome measure was the comparison of recovery characteristics.

Results

The airway was secured using ETT in 41 patients and LMA in 39 patients. Airway safety was established in all patients without a complication throughout the procedure. Mean arterial blood pressure and heart rate were increased to > 20% of baseline levels at intubation and extubation periods in more patients in the ETT group than the LMA group (27 vs. 3; p = 0.07, and 11 vs. 2; p = 0.021). Respiratory adverse events including straining and coughing were observed in ten patients in the ETT group but only in one patient in the LMA group (p = 0.013). Time to extubation, to neurological assessment, and to discharge from the angiography unit were similar (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

It was concluded that LMA provided sufficient airway safety as with ETT and may be used as an alternative to ETT for EVTs under general anesthesia.

Anesthesiologist and COVID-19-current perspective

In the current situation when the world is grappling with COVID-19 that has taken a toll on humanity and is continuing to affect multiples of health-care workers all over the world in vast numbers, the pandemonium (mayhem) has led to grim concerns. We have made an effort to compile and present a review that provides an insight into the management of patients for the front-line anesthesiologists of the medical war, which is being fought to curb and contain this COVID-19 pandemic. We have tried to incorporate the operating room locations, as well as the remote locations where anesthesiologist may be called upon for providing their services. Needless to say, it is of utmost importance to ensure the safety of the patient, as well as of the anesthesiologist who are involved in the patient care at this crucial juncture. The present article provides valuable information to anesthesiologists regarding handling the current pandemic in a protocolized and evidence-based manner.