scholarly journals Safety and quality of endovascular therapy under general anesthesia and conscious sedation are comparable: results from the GOLIATH trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 1070-1072 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leif H Sørensen ◽  
Lasse Speiser ◽  
Sanja Karabegovic ◽  
Albert J Yoo ◽  
Mads Rasmussen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Endovascular Therapy ◽  
Conscious Sedation ◽  
Stent Retriever ◽  
Procedure Time ◽  
Anterior Circulation ◽  
Unique Identifier ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Aspiration Technique

BackgroundThe “General or Local Anesthesia in Intra-Arterial Therapy” (GOLIATH) trial compared infarct growth and outcome in patients undergoing endovascular therapy (EVT) under either general anesthesia (GA) or conscious sedation (CS). The results were the same for the primary outcome (infarct growth) but successful reperfusion was higher in the GA arm.ObjectiveTo further examine differences in the quality and safety of EVT with the two anesthetic regimens in a post hoc analysis of GOLIATH.MethodsIn GOLIATH, 128 subjects with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke within 6 hours of onset were randomized to either GA or CS (1:1 allocation). We compared the quality of reperfusion, treatment delay, use of catheters, and contrast and radiation dosage between the trial arms.ResultsSixty-five subjects were randomized to GA. Baseline demographic and clinical variables were similar between the treatment arms. We found no difference in procedure time, contrast dose, or radiation dose between the two arms. Tandem occlusions were associated with a longer procedure time, but there was no difference between the two arms. There was no difference in reperfusion rates between the direct aspiration technique and a stent retriever (86% vs 79%, respectively, p=0.54), but aspiration was associated with a shorter procedure time (28 min vs 42 min for a stent retriever), p=0.03.ConclusionSafety and quality of EVT under either GA and CS are comparable.Trial registrationUnique identifier: NCT02317237;Post-results.

Anesthetic strategy during endovascular therapy: General anesthesia or conscious sedation? (GOLIATH – General or Local Anesthesia in Intra Arterial Therapy) A single-center randomized trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1045-1052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus Z Simonsen ◽  
Leif H Sørensen ◽  
Niels Juul ◽  
Søren P Johnsen ◽  
Albert J Yoo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Therapy ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Conscious Sedation ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Vessel Occlusion

Rationale Endovascular therapy after acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion is now standard of care. There is equipoise as to what kind of anesthesia patients should receive during the procedure. Observational studies suggest that general anesthesia is associated with worse outcomes compared to conscious sedation. However, the findings may have been biased. Randomized clinical trials are needed to determine whether the choice of anesthesia may influence outcome. Aim and hypothesis The objective of GOLIATH (General or Local Anestesia in Intra Arterial Therapy) is to examine whether the choice of anesthetic regime during endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke influence patient outcome. Our hypothesis is that that conscious sedation is associated with less infarct growth and better functional outcome. Methods GOLIATH is an investigator-initiated, single-center, randomized study. Patients with acute ischemic stroke, scheduled for endovascular therapy, are randomized to receive either general anesthesia or conscious sedation. Study outcomes The primary outcome measure is infarct growth after 48–72 h (determined by serial diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging). Secondary outcomes include 90-day modified Rankin Scale score, time parameters, blood pressure variables, use of vasopressors, procedural and anesthetic complications, success of revascularization, radiation dose, and amount of contrast media. Discussion Choice of anesthesia may influence outcome in acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing endovascular therapy. The results from this study may guide future decisions regarding the optimal anesthetic regime for endovascular therapy. In addition, this study may provide preliminary data for a multicenter randomized trial.

scholarly journals Conscious Sedation Versus General Anesthesia During Endovascular Therapy for Acute Anterior Circulation Stroke

Stroke ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 1175-1179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Abou-Chebl ◽  
Ridwan Lin ◽  
Muhammad Shazam Hussain ◽  
Tudor G. Jovin ◽  
Elad I. Levy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Endovascular Therapy ◽  
Conscious Sedation ◽  
Anterior Circulation

scholarly journals GASS Trial study protocol: a multicentre, single-blind, randomised clinical trial comparing general anaesthesia and sedation during intra-arterial treatment for stroke

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. e024249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axelle Maurice ◽  
Jean-Christophe Ferré ◽  
Thomas Ronzière ◽  
Jean-Michel Devys ◽  
Aurelie Subileau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multicentre Study ◽  
General Anaesthesia ◽  
Endovascular Therapy ◽  
Conscious Sedation ◽  
Randomised Clinical Trial ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Anterior Circulation ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Single Blind

IntroductionTreatment of acute stroke has drastically changed in the last 10 years. Endovascular therapy is now the standard of care for patients with a stroke caused by a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation. The impact of the type of anaesthesia (general anaesthesia or conscious sedation) during endovascular therapy on the outcome of the patients is still a matter of debate. Previous studies are mostly retrospective and/or focused on the early postprocedure outcome and/or without blood pressure goals and/or single-centre small size studies. We therefore designed a multicentre study hypothesising that conscious sedation is associated with a better functional outcome 3 months after endovascular therapy for the treatment of stroke compared with general anaesthesia.Methods/analysisThe General Anesthesia vs Sedation for Stroke (GASS) Trial is a randomised, parallel, single-blind, multicentre study of 350 patients undergoing endovascular therapy for the treatment of stroke. Patients will be randomly allocated to receive either a general anaesthesia or a conscious sedation. The primary outcome measure is the modified Rankin score assessed 3 months after the treatment. Data will be analysed on the intention-to-treat principle.Ethics/disseminationThe GASS Trial has been approved by an independent ethics committee for all study centres. Participant recruitment begins in September 2016. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed medical journals.Trial registration numberNCT02822144.

EXPRESS: Stent Retriever Alone vs. Aspiration and Stent-Retriever Combination in Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke: A Matched Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 174749302110192
Author(s):  
Mahmoud H Mohammaden ◽  
Diogo C. Haussen ◽  
Leonardo Pisani ◽  
Alhamza Al-Bayati ◽  
Aaron Anderson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Functional Independence ◽  
Stent Retriever ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
First Line ◽  
Anterior Circulation ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Guide Catheter ◽  
First Pass ◽  
Combined Technique

Background Three randomized clinical trials have reported similar safety and efficacy for contact aspiration (CA) and Stent-retriever (SR) thrombectomy. Aim We aimed to determine whether the Combined Technique (SR+CA) was superior to SR alone as first-line thrombectomy strategy in a patient cohort where balloon-guide catheter was universally used. Methods A prospectively maintained mechanical thrombectomy database from January 2018-December 2019 was reviewed. Patients were included if they had anterior circulation proximal occlusion ischemic stroke (intracranial ICA or MCA-M1/M2 segments) and underwent SR alone thrombectomy or SR+CA as first-line therapy. The primary outcome was the first-pass effect (FPE) (mTICI2c-3). Secondary outcomes included modified FPE (mTICI2b-3), successful reperfusion (mTICI2b-3) prior to and after any rescue strategy, and 90-day functional independence (mRS ≤2). Safety outcomes included rate of parenchymal hematoma (PH) type-2 and 90-day mortality. Sensitivity analyses were performed after dividing the overall cohort according to first-line modality into two matched groups. Results A total of 420 patients were included in the analysis (mean age 64.4 years; median baseline NIHSS 16[11-21]). As compared to first-line SR alone, first-line SR+CA resulted in similar rates of FPE (53% vs. 51%,aOR 1.122, 95%CI[0.745-1.691],p=0.58), mFPE (63% vs. 60.4%,aOR1.250, 95%CI[0.782-2.00],p=0.35), final successful reperfusion (97.6% vs. 98%,p=0.75) and higher chances of successful reperfusion prior to any rescue strategy (81.8% vs. 72.5%,aOR 2.033, 95%CI[1.209-3.419],p=0.007). Functional outcome and safety measures were comparable between both groups. Likewise, the matched analysis (148 patient-pairs) demonstrated comparable results for all clinical and angiographic outcomes except for significantly higher rates of successful reperfusion prior to any rescue strategies with the first-line SR+CA treatment (81.8% vs. 73.6%,aOR 1.881, 95%CI[1.039-3.405],p=0.037). Conclusions Our findings reinforce the findings of ASTER-2 trial in that the first-line thrombectomy with a Combined Technique did not result in increased rates of first-pass reperfusion or better clinical outcomes. However, addition of contact aspiration after initial SR failure might be beneficial in achieving earlier reperfusion.

scholarly journals Outcome of endovascular treatment within and beyond 6 h without perfusion software

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen Jing ◽  
Hao Li ◽  
Shengming Huang ◽  
Min Guan ◽  
Yongxin Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Anterior Circulation ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

AbstractEndovascular treatment (EVT) has been accepted as the standard of care for patients with acute ischemic stroke. The aim of the present study was to compare clinical outcomes of patients who received EVT within and beyond 6 h from symptom onset to groin puncture without perfusion software in Guangdong district, China. Between March 2017 and May 2018, acute ischemic stroke patients who received EVT from 6 comprehensive stroke centers, were enrolled into the registry study. In this subgroup study, we included all patients who had acute proximal large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation. The demographic, clinical and neuroimaging data were collected from each center. A total of 192 patients were included in this subgroup study. They were divided into two groups: group A (n = 125), within 6 h; group B (n = 67), 6–24 h from symptom onset to groin puncture. There were no substantial differences between these two groups in terms of 90 days favorable outcome (modified Rankin scale [mRS] ≤ 2, P = 0.051) and mortality (P = 0.083), and the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 24 h (P = 0.425). The NIHSS (median 16, IQR12-20, group A; median 12, IQR8-18, group B; P = 0.009) and ASPECTS (median 10, IQR8-10, group A; median 9, IQR8-10, group B; P = 0.034) at baseline were higher in group A. The anesthesia method (general anesthesia, 21.3%, group A vs. 1.5% group B, P = 0.001) were also statistically different between the two groups. The NIHSS and ASPECTS were higher, and general anesthesia was also more widely used in group A. Clinical outcomes were not significantly different within 6 h versus 6–24 h from symptom onset to groin puncture in this real world study.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document