Anesthesia Technique and Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Local Anesthesia for Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Allows for Accurate Graft Deployment with Durable Results

BACKGROUND

Local anesthesia (LA) is sparsely used in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) despite short-term benefit, likely secondary to concerns over patient movement preventing accurate endograft deployment. The objective of this study is to examine the association between anesthesia type and endoleak, sac regression, reintervention, and mortality.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for all EVAR cases from 2014 to 2022. Patients were included if they underwent percutaneous elective EVAR with anatomical criteria within instructions for use of commercially approved endografts. Multivariable logistic regression with propensity score weighting was used to determine the association between anesthesia type on the risk of any endoleak noted by intraoperative completion angiogram and sac regression. Multivariable survival analysis with propensity score weighting was used to determine the association between anesthesia type and endoleak at 1 year, long-term reintervention, and mortality.

RESULTS

Thirteen thousand nine hundred thirty two EVARs met inclusion criteria: 1,075 (8%) LA and 12,857 (92%) general anesthesia (GA). On completion angiogram, LA was associated with fewer rates of any endoleaks overall (16% vs. 24%, P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis with propensity score weighting, LA was associated with similar adjusted odds of any endoleak on intraoperative completion angiogram (odds ratio [OR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.68) as well as combined type 1a and type 1b endoleaks (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.47-1.09). Follow-up computed tomography imaging at 1 year was available for 4,892 patients, 377 (8%) LA and 4,515 (92%) GA. At 1 year, LA was associated with similar rate of freedom from any endoleaks compared to GA (0.66 [95% CI 0.63-0.69] vs. 0.71 [95% CI 0.70-0.72], P = 0.663) and increased rates of sac regression (50% vs. 45%, P = 0.040). On multivariable analysis with propensity score weighting, LA and GA were associated with similar adjusted odds of sac regression (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.97-1.55). LA and GA had similar rates of endoleak at 1 year (hazard ratio [HR] 0.14, 95% CI 0.63-1.07); however, LA was associated with decreased hazards of combined type 1a and 1b endoleaks at 1 year (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.96). LA and GA had similar adjusted long-term reintervention rate (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.44-1.38) and long-term mortality (HR 1.100, 95% CI 079-1.25).

CONCLUSIONS

LA is not associated with increased adjusted rates of any endoleak on completion angiogram or at 1-year follow-up compared to GA. LA is associated with decreased adjusted rates of type 1a and type 1b endoleak at 1 year, but similar rates of sac regression, long-term reintervention, and mortality. Concerns for accurate graft deployment should not preclude use of LA and LA should be increasingly considered when deciding on anesthetic type for standard elective EVAR.

Locoregional anesthesia is associated with reduced hospital stay and need for intensive care unit care of elective endovascular aneurysm repair patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative

OBJECTIVE

It has been shown local or regional anesthetic techniques are a feasible alternative to general anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). However, studies to date have shown controversial findings with respect to the benefit of locoregional anesthesia (LR) in the elective setting. The objective of this study is to compare postoperative outcomes between LR and general anesthesia (GA) in the setting of elective EVAR, using a large, multicenter database.

METHODS

Using the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative database, we retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent elective EVAR from August 2003 to June 2021. Patients were grouped by anesthetic type based on the level of consciousness afforded by the anesthetic: local or regional anesthesia (LR) vs GA. Primary outcomes were total postoperative hospital length-of-stay (LOS) and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS. Propensity score matching was used for risk adjustment and to analyze the primary outcomes with confirmatory analysis using logistic or linear regression, as appropriate, in single and multilevel models. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality, postoperative outcomes, operative time, fluoroscopy time, and reoperation rate. These were analyzed following propensity score matching as well as using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard regression in single and multilevel models, as appropriate.

RESULTS

A total of 50,809 patients underwent elective EVAR from 2003 to 2021. Of these, 4302 repairs used LR (8.5%) and 46,507 (91.5%) were performed under GA. After employing propensity score matching, two groups of 3027 patients were produced. These showed no significant difference in 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 1.22; P = .53), 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.06; P = .62), or any postoperative outcomes. LR was found to be significantly associated with shorter hospital stays (≤2 days) (12.5% vs 14.8%; P = .01), decreased ICU utilization (19.3% vs 30.6%; P < .001), decreased operative time (110.8 vs 117.3 minutes; P < .001), decreased fluoroscopy time (21.0 vs 22.7 minutes; P < .001), and a slight reduction in reoperation rate (1.2% vs 1.9%; P = .02), which all remained significant following single-level and multilevel multivariate analyses accounting for hospital and physician random effects.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that LR anesthesia is safe and may offer advantages in reducing resource utilization for patients undergoing elective EVAR, primarily based on associations with reduced ICU care and reduced hospital stay. Given these findings, LR may prove an advantageous technique in appropriately selected patient populations.

Influence of Anesthetic Techniques on Perioperative Outcomes after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to explore the influence of anesthetic techniques on perioperative outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in a Chinese population.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed in patients after elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA at our single center. Patients were classified into general anesthesia (GA), regional anesthesia (RA), and local anesthesia (LA) groups. The primary outcomes (30-day mortality and morbidity) and secondary outcomes [procedure time, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and length of hospital stay (LOS)] were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

From January 2006 to December 2015, 486 consecutive patients underwent elective EVAR at our center. GA was used in 155 patients (31.9%), RA in 56 (11.5%), and LA in 275 (56.6%). The GA patients had fewer respiratory comorbidities, shorter and more angulated proximal necks, and more concomitant iliac aneurysms. LA during EVAR was significantly associated with a shorter procedure time (GA, P < 0.001; RA, P < 0.001) and shorter LOS (GA, P = 0.002; RA, P = 0.001), but a higher MAP (GA, P < 0.001; RA, P < 0.001) compared with GA and RA. LA was associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiac (odds ratio (OR) 4.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21-15.04), pulmonary (OR 5.37, 95% CI 1.58-18.23), and systemic complications (OR 4.15, 95% CI 1.85-9.33) compared with GA. RA was also associated with a decreased risk of systemic complications (OR 4.74, 95% CI 1.19-18.92) compared with GA. There was no difference in the 30-day mortality, neurologic complications, renal complications, and intraoperative extra procedures among the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Anesthetic techniques for EVAR have no influence on the 30-day mortality. LA for EVAR appears to be beneficial concerning the procedure time, LOS, and 30-day systemic complications for patients after elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA in the Chinese population.

Monitored Anesthesia Care Is Associated With a Decrease in Morbidity After Endovascular Angioplasty in Aortoiliac Disease

OBJECTIVES

Few studies have evaluated the association between anesthesia type and outcomes after endovascular angioplasty/stents for aortoiliac occlusive disease. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the association between primary anesthesia type and postprocedural complications for endovascular angioplasty of aortoiliac occlusion.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Multi-institutional.

PARTICIPANTS

The study comprised 3,110 patients undergoing endovascular angioplasty of aortoiliac occlusive disease, with 1,974 and 1,136 patients who underwent monitored anesthesia care (MAC) and general anesthesia (GA), respectively. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for the years 2012 to 2016 was used for the present study.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The final analysis included 3,110 patients, 63% of whom received MAC and 37% of whom received GA. The mean age was 64 years among the GA group, of whom 57.2% were male. The mean age among that MAC group was 65 years, 55.8% of whom were male. After adjusting for demographic factors and preoperative comorbidities, there was a statistically significant lower odds of postoperative complications (ie, pulmonary complications, infection, intraoperative/postoperative transfusion, reoperation, and amputation) and shorter length of stay in the MAC group compared with the GA group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although larger observational studies and randomized controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the potential effect of MAC versus GA, MAC anesthesia should be considered for patients undergoing endovascular angioplasty for aortoiliac occlusion.

General anesthesia versus local anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

The aim of this study was to compare general and local anesthesia techniques in patients treated with elective endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal aortic aneurysms.In this single-center, observational cohort study, in all, 259 consecutive patients who underwent elective EVAR was included; 144 patients (55.6%, 126 men, mean age 72.8 years) operated on under general anesthesia (GA group) and 115 (44.4%, 100 men, mean age 72.3 years) operated on under local anesthesia (LA group). A retrospective analysis regarding technical feasibility, endoleaks, length of hospital stay, and 30-day clinical outcomes was performed.There was no anesthetic conversion (from LA to GA) during EVAR, and no significant difference was noted in the incidence of endoleaks and its types in relation to anesthetic techniques on final completion angiograms (14.1% vs 18.4%; P = .347) and follow-up computed tomography angiogram at 30 days after EVAR (23.6% vs 19.1%; P = .384). Significant differences were not observed with regard to a prolonged length of hospital stay in relation to anesthetic techniques (8.6 ± 16.3 vs 7.2 ± 3.3; P = .348), and the main outcomes showed no significant differences in morbidity (20.1% vs 16.5%; P = .457), mortality (0.0% vs 0.0%), and the rates of secondary therapeutic procedures (9.7% vs 4.3%; P = .099) between the 2 groups during the 30-day follow-up.We have not shown a definite difference in 30-day outcomes between GA and LA for EVAR. The anesthetist and surgeon, in consultation with the patient, should decide which anesthetic technique to use on an individual basis.

Loco-regional versus general anaesthesia for elective endovascular aneurysm repair – results of a cohort study and a meta-analysis

Abstract. Background: The aim of this study was to investigate whether patients undergoing elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with loco-regional anaesthetic techniques have better outcomes than those treated with general anaesthesia (GA). Patients and methods: We retrospectively evaluated outcomes of EVAR performed with regional anaesthesia (RA) or GA over a five-year period. Furthermore, we searched electronic bibliographic sources (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL) to identify studies comparing different anaesthetic methods in EVAR. We defined perioperative mortality and morbidity as well as length of hospital stay (LOS) as the primary outcome measures. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effects models. Results are reported as the odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) and 95 % confidence interval (CI). Results: Three hundred and fifty-five patients underwent standard EVAR over the study period (RA, 215 patients; GA 140 patients). Patients in both groups had comparable baseline demographics and clinical characteristics. Perioperative mortality was significantly lower in the RA group (0.5 % vs. 4.3 %, P = 0.017). No difference was found in perioperative morbidity (P = 0.370), LOS (P = 0.146), postoperative destination (P = 0.799), reoperation (P = 0.355) or readmission within 30 days (P = 0.846). Meta-analysis of data on 15,472 patients from 15 observational studies found a significantly lower perioperative mortality (OR 0.70, 95 % CI 0.52–0.95, P = 0.02) and morbidity (OR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.55–0.96, P = 0.02) in patients treated with loco-regional anaesthetic techniques compared to those treated with GA. Our sub-group analysis demonstrated that both local anaesthesia (LA) (P = 0.003) and RA (P < 0.0001) were associated with a significantly shorter LOS compared to GA. Conclusions: Local and/or regional anaesthetic techniques may be advantageous over GA in elective EVAR, as indicated by reduced perioperative mortality and morbidity and a shorter hospital stay. Considering the current level of evidence, LA or RA should be considered in selected patients. Further clinical research is required to provide high level evidence on the optimal anaesthetic technique in EVAR.

Paravertebral Blockade with Propofol Sedation versus General Anesthesia for Elective Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

The objective of this study was to evaluate the applicability of paravertebral blockade (PVB) for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair compared with general anesthesia (GA).

Data from patients who underwent elective infrarenal endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair between August 2001 and July 2002 using PVB or GA were retrospectively reviewed and compared with respect to risk factors, intraoperative hemodynamic characteristics, operative outcome, and complications.

Ten patients underwent elective infrarenal endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair under PVB, whereas 15 patients were operated on under GA. One conversion from PVB to GA was necessary for block failure. The perioperative (< 30 days) cardiovascular morbidity and overall mortality were zero in both groups. The PVB group benefited significantly with respect to the incidence of intraoperative hypotension ( p < .05) and blood pressure lability ( p < .01), as well as postoperative nausea ( p < .01). Our preliminary results indicate that PVB is feasible and can be performed safely in a patient population with significant comorbidities.

Renal Function is the Main Predictor of Acute Kidney Injury after Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) may occur in up to 18% of elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and has been associated with poor outcome; however, it is not clear which patients are at highest risk, to target renoprotection effectively. We sought to determine the predictive factors of AKI after elective EVAR.

METHODS

Overall, 947 patients undergoing elective EVAR between January 2004 and December 2014 were analyzed, using prospectively collected data. Postoperative AKI was defined by serum creatinine change within 48 hr, as per the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guidelines. Cardiovascular and kidney-disease risk factors were entered in univariate and multivariate analyses to assess influence on AKI development.

RESULTS

Overall, 167 (17.6%) patients developed AKI but only 2 patients required dialysis perioperatively. At multivariate analysis, adjusted for established AKI-risk factors and parameters that differed between groups at baseline, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR; as per the chronic kidney disease epidemiology [CKD] formula); odds ratio (OR): 1.02 (per unit decrease); 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.003-1.041; P = 0.025; and chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage > 2 (OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.249-2.531, P = 0.001) were associated with development of AKI.

CONCLUSIONS

AKI was common after elective infrarenal EVAR and preoperative renal function appears to be the main factor associated with AKI. Patients with a low eGFR need to be targeted with more aggressive renal protection.

Long-Term Renal Function after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Endovascular repair (EVAR) is a common treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). However, its long-term effects on renal function remain unclear. We aimed to assess long-term renal dysfunction after EVAR using a contemporary estimate of GFR and to compare long-term renal outcomes in patients after EVAR with open aneurysm repair (OAR) and in patients without an AAA.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We performed a nested case-matched analysis of 726 patients (using a prospectively maintained database for repairs that took place between January 2000 and May 2010 in a tertiary center): 121 patients undergoing OAR (with data at baseline and 5 years postrepair) were case matched (age, sex, smoking, diabetes, baseline eGFR) to patients undergoing suprarenal and infrarenal fixation EVAR (242 in each group) and to 121 patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) without AAA. Changes in eGFR were compared (1 and 5 years).

RESULTS

The OAR patients lost an average of 7.4 ml/min per 1.73 m2 at 5 years (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 4.8 to 10.6), compared with 8.2 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (95% CI, 6.5 to 10.8; P<0.001) for infrarenal-fixation EVAR, 16.9 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (95% CI, 13.0 to 21.9, P<0.001) for suprarenal-fixation EVAR, and 5.4 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (95% CI, 1.7 to 7.5; P<0.001) for CEA. The decrease in eGFR was steeper during the first postoperative year, with each group losing -2.2 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (infrarenal-fixation EVAR), -10.7 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (suprarenal-fixation EVAR), and -4.6 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (OAR), compared with -1.9 ml/min per 1.73 m2 for CEA.

CONCLUSIONS

Elective EVAR is associated with a significant decline in eGFR after 5 years, which is steeper in the first postoperative year and more pronounced compared with a similar population with atherosclerotic disease.

Effects of Anesthesia Type on Perioperative Outcome After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

PURPOSE

To examine outcomes of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) using general, regional, or local anesthesia.

METHODS

From March 2009 to April 2011, patients were enrolled from 79 sites in 30 countries worldwide and treated with an Endurant Stent Graft System. Data were compared among 3 groups based on the method of anesthesia: general anesthesia (GA) was used in 785 (62%) patients, regional anesthesia (RA) in 331 (27%) patients, and local anesthesia (LA) in 145 (11%) patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to adjust for possible confounding factors; outcomes are presented as the odds ratio and 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

There were intercontinental differences in the distribution of type of anesthesia used for EVAR. Higher ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) classification was associated with predominant use of GA. Procedure time was reduced in LA (80.4±40.0 minutes) compared with RA (94.2±41.6 min, adjusted p=0.001) and GA (105.3±46.0 minutes, adjusted p<0.001). Intensive care unit (ICU) admission was less frequent for RA than for GA (adjusted OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.97, p=0.030) and LA (adjusted OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.79, p=0.002). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter for RA and LA compared with GA (adjusted p=0.003 and p=0.010, respectively). There were no significant differences in systemic and surgical complications. Mortality rates within 30 days did not differ among the groups.

CONCLUSION

Type of anesthesia used during EVAR has no influence on perioperative mortality and morbidity. The use of local or regional anesthesia during EVAR appeared to be beneficial concerning procedure time, ICU admission, and postoperative hospital stay.

Regional anesthesia for vascular surgery

Patients presenting for vascular surgery present a challenge to anesthesiologists because of their severe systemic comorbidities. Regional anesthesia has been used as a primary anesthetic technique for many vascular procedures to avoid the cardiovascular and pulmonary perturbations associated with general anesthesia. In this article the use of regional anesthesia for carotid endarterectomy, open and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, infrainguinal arterial bypass, lower extremity amputation, and arteriovenous fistula formation is described. A focus is placed on reviewing the literature comparing anesthetic techniques, with brief descriptions of the techniques themselves.

Endovascular repair of a large ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm using monitored anesthesia care and local anesthesia

Over the last decade, there has been a paradigm shift in the treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) from open repair to endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Regardless of the method used during emergent rupture, open verses endovascular repair, the overall mortality remains high. Recent studies have compared patient outcomes using different types of anesthesia during elective EVAR procedures. The data show that during an elective EVAR, monitored anesthesia care (MAC) with local anesthesia is not only just as safe as general anesthesia, but it offers other potential benefits as well. There is limited data in regards to patient outcomes using MAC and local anesthesia during cases of large ruptured aneurysms that are treated with EVAR. This case report discusses the treatment of a patient who presented with a large 13 cm ruptured AAA which was successfully repaired using EVAR with MAC and local anesthesia.

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the geriatric population

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a relatively common pathology among the elderly. More people above the age of 80 will have to undergo treatment of an AAA in the future. This review aims to summarize the literature focusing on endovascular repair of AAA in the geriatric population. A systematic review of the literature was performed, including results from endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) registries and studies comparing open repair and EVAR in those above the age of 80. A total of 15 studies were identified. EVAR in this population is efficient with a success rate exceeding 90% in all cases, and safe, with early mortality and morbidity being superior among patients undergoing EVAR against open repair. Late survival can be as high as 95% after 5 years. Aneurysm-related death over long-term follow-up was low after EVAR, ranging from 0 to 3.4%. Endovascular repair can be offered safely in the geriatric population and seems to compare favourably with open repair in all studies in the literature to date.

Endovascular aneurysm repair: a perioperative perspective

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), has surpassed open repair as the technique of choice in many centres in response to several large studies which showed significantly improved 30-day mortality. While several multicentre EVAR trials looked at surgical outcomes, very few have specifically investigated the effect of anaesthetic techniques or perioperative care of these patients. The purpose of this review to is to present some of the current evidence for the different aspects of perioperative management of patients undergoing EVAR. This includes surgical considerations, pre-operative assessment, and choice of anaesthetic technique as well as pharmacological protective strategies.

General anaesthesia is associated with adverse cardiac outcome after endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is associated with reduced cardiac stress compared with open repair and is an attractive therapeutic option, especially in cardiac fragile patients. General and locoregional anaesthesia differ regarding the stress response evoked by surgery. The aim of the study is to compare the incidence of cardiac events after EVAR under general or locoregional anaesthesia.

METHODS

A total of 302 consecutive patients undergoing infrarenal EVAR between 2002 and 2011 were analysed in this retrospective cohort study. Selection of anaesthesia type was at the discretion of the treating physicians. Medical history, medication use, anaesthesia technique and follow-up were obtained. The study end point was 30-day cardiac complications, including cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, heart failure, ventricular arrhythmia and troponin T release. Multivariable analysis, adjusted for the propensity of receiving a locoregional technique and cardiac risk factors according to the Revised Cardiac Risk Index, was used to assess the association between cardiac events and anaesthesia type.

RESULTS

A total of 173 patients underwent general anaesthesia and 129 locoregional anaesthesia. Obesity, aspirin use and therapeutic anticoagulation were more common in patients receiving general anaesthesia. Cardiac events were observed in 13.3% of patients receiving general anaesthesia and in 4.7% of patients receiving locoregional anaesthesia (P = 0.02), or 6.4% versus .8% (P = 0.02) when asymptomatic troponin release is excluded from the end point. In the general anaesthesia group, two cardiac deaths, six non-fatal myocardial infarctions, two cases of non-fatal heart failure, one non-fatal cardiac arrest and 12 cases of troponin T release were observed, compared with one myocardial infarction and five cases of troponin T release in the locoregional anaesthesia group. In multivariable analysis, general anaesthesia was associated with adverse cardiac events (odds ratio (OR) 3.8; 95%-confidence interval (CI) 1.1-12.9). Non-cardiac complications occurred in 11.6% of patients in both groups (P = 1.00).

CONCLUSION

General anaesthesia was associated with an increased risk of cardiac events in EVAR, compared with locoregional anaesthesia.

Results of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair with general, regional, and local/monitored anesthesia care in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database

BACKGROUND

This study examined outcomes of endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR) using general, spinal, epidural, and local/monitored anesthesia care (MAC) in a multicenter North American hospital database reflecting contemporary anesthesia and surgical practices.

METHODS

Elective EVAR cases performed between 2005 and 2008 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Excluded were emergency cases and patients with concomitant procedures requiring general anesthesia. Patient-level comorbidities, characteristics, and intraoperative and postoperative details were examined. Complications were analyzed individually and in aggregate categories, including wound, pulmonary, renal, venous thromboembolic, cardiovascular, operative, and septic. Length of stay (LOS) and 30-day mortality were examined. Characteristics and outcomes were described using mean ± standard deviation or count (%), and comparisons were evaluated for statistical significance using χ(2), Fisher exact test, and univariate linear regression. LOS was analyzed with linear regression techniques using a log transformation. Associations between anesthesia type and outcomes were examined using univariable and multivariable regression techniques.

RESULTS

We identified 6009 elective EVAR procedures for analysis. General anesthesia was used in 4868 cases, spinal anesthesia in 419, epidural anesthesia in 331, and local/MAC in 391. Defined morbidity occurred in 11% of patients. Median LOS was 2 (interquartile range, 1-3) days, and mean LOS was 2.8 ± 4.3 days. The 30-day mortality rate was 1.1%. Significant multivariate associations were observed between anesthesia type, pulmonary morbidity, and log-LOS. General anesthesia was associated with an increase in pulmonary morbidity vs spinal (odds ratio [OR], 4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-12.5; P = .020) and local/MAC anesthesia (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.0-6.4; P = .041). Use of general anesthesia was associated with a 10% increase in LOS for general vs spinal anesthesia (95% CI, 4.8%-15.5%; P = .001) and a 20% increase for general vs local/MAC anesthesia (95% CI, 14.1%-26.2%; P < .001). Trends toward increased pulmonary morbidity and LOS were not observed for general vs epidural anesthesia. No significant association between anesthesia type and mortality was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In contemporary North American anesthetic and surgical practice, general anesthesia for EVAR was associated with increased postoperative LOS and pulmonary morbidity compared with spinal and local/MAC anesthesia. These data suggest that increasing the use of less-invasive anesthetic techniques may limit postoperative complications and decrease the overall costs of EVAR.

Local anaesthesia for endovascular repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to analyse and report the results of a 'local anaesthesia first' approach in elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2007 and August 2010, a total of 217 continuous patients (187 men, median age 76 years, range 52-94 years) underwent elective EVAR using this approach, with predefined exclusion criteria for local anaesthesia (LA). A retrospective analysis regarding technical feasibility, mortality, complication and endoleak rate was performed. The results are reported as an observational study.

RESULTS

LA was applied in 183 patients (84%), regional anaesthesia (RA) in nine patients (4%) and general anaesthesia (GA) in 25 patients (12%). Anaesthetic conversion from LA to GA was necessary in 14 patients (7.6%). Airway obstruction (n = 4) and persistent coughing (n = 3) were the most common causes for conversion to GA. Thirty-day mortality in the LA group was 2.7%, with 16/183 patients (8.7%) experiencing postoperative complications. All type I endoleaks (n = 5, 2.7%) occurred in patients with LA and challenging aneurysm morphologies.

CONCLUSIONS

A 'local anaesthesia first' strategy can successfully be applied in 75% of patients undergoing EVAR. The use of LA can impact imaging quality and thus precise endograft placement, which should be considered in patients with challenging aneurysm morphologies.

Risk-Adapted Outcome After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair:Analysis of Anesthesia Types Based on EUROSTAR Data

PURPOSE

To compare anesthesia techniques in high-risk versus low-risk patients treated with endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) with respect to outcomes.

METHODS

From July 1997 to August 2004, 5557 patients were enrolled in the EUROSTAR registry by 164 centers. Low-risk and high-risk patients were each divided into 3 groups according to anesthesia used during operation [general (GA), regional (RA), and local (LA)], resulting in 6 groups. Differences in preoperative and operative details among the 3 types of anesthesia were analyzed using a chi-square test for discrete variables and the Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables for each risk profile. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed on early complications.

RESULTS

Intensive care unit (ICU) admission was less frequent for high-LA (1.2% of patients) than high-RA (7.8%, p=0.0071) and high-GA (16.2%, p<0.0001), but high-RA still had a distinct advantage (p<0.0001) over high-GA. Systemic complications were lower both for high-LA (9.0%, p=0.0128) and for high-RA (10.7%, p<0.0001) than for high-GA (18.3%). Early death (< or =30 days) was reduced in high-RA (3.0%) versus high-GA (4.3%, p=0.0286).

CONCLUSION

On the basis of the EUROSTAR data, high-risk patients in particular attain important advantages from minimally invasive anesthetic techniques. Mortality, morbidity, hospital stay, and ICU admission are significantly lower for locoregional versus general anesthesia in the EUROSTAR registry. These results should encourage greater use of regional anesthesia in high-risk patients. Local anesthesia seems to be of similar benefit for EVAR in high-risk patients.

Influence of anesthesia type on outcome after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: An analysis based on EUROSTAR data

BACKGROUND

Local and regional anesthesia was used in endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) shortly after its introduction, and the feasibility has been documented several times. Nevertheless, locoregional anesthesia has not become accepted on a large scale, probably owing to a traditional surgical attitude preferring general anesthesia. This study compared various anesthesia techniques in patients treated with EVAR for infrarenal aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

From July 1997 to August 2004, 5557 patients who underwent EVAR repair in 164 centers were enrolled in the EUROSTAR registry. Data were compared among three groups: a general anesthesia group (GA-G) of 3848 patients (69%), a regional anesthesia group (RA-G) of 1399 patients (25%), and the local anesthesia group (LA-G) of 310 patients (6%). Differences in preoperative and operative details among the three study groups were analyzed using the chi(2) test for discrete variables and the Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed on early complications.

RESULTS

The duration of the operation was reduced in the LA-G (115.7 +/- 42.2 minutes) compared with the RA-G (127.6 +/- 52.8 min, P < .0009) and GA-G (133.3 +/- 59.1 minutes, P < .0001). Admission to the intensive care unit was significantly less for LA-G patients (2%) than RA-G (8.3%, P = .0004) and GA-G (16.2%, P < .0001), but RA-G still had a distinct advantage (P < .0001) over GA-G. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in LA-G (3.7 +/- 3.1 days [P < .0001] vs GA-G [P = .007] vs RA-G), but RA-G (5.1 +/- 7.5 days) still had an advantage (P < .0001) vs GA-G (6.2 +/- 8.5 days). In EUROSTAR, systemic complications were significantly lower both for LA-G (6.6%, P = .0015) and RA-G (9.5%, P = .0007) than for GA-G (13.0%).

CONCLUSION

The EUROSTAR data indicate that patients appeared to benefit when a locoregional anesthetic technique was used for EVAR. Locoregional techniques should be used more often to enhance the perioperative advantage of EVAR in treating infrarenal aneurysms of the abdominal aorta.