Comparison of anesthesia methods for intra-arterial therapy of patients with acute ischemic stroke: an updated meta-analysis and systematic review

Abstract

Abstract Objectives Currently, there remains debate regarding the optimal anesthesia approach for patients undergoing intra-arterial therapy for acute ischemic stroke. Therefore, we conducted a comparative analysis to assess the effects of general anesthesia versus non general anesthesia on patient outcomes. Methods The research methodology entailed comprehensive searches of prominent databases such as the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, covering the period from January 1, 2010, to March 1, 2024. Data synthesis employed techniques like risk ratio or standardized mean difference, along with 95% confidence intervals. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024523079). Results A total of 27 trials and 12,875 patients were included in this study. The findings indicated that opting for non-general anesthesia significantly decreased the risk of in-hospital mortality (RR, 1.98; 95% CI: 1.50 to 2.61; p<0.00001; I2 = 20%), as well as mortality within three months post-procedure (RR, 1.24; 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.34; p<0.00001; I2 = 26%), while also leading to a shorter hospitalization duration (SMD, 0.24; 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.33; p<0.00001; I2 = 44%). Conclusion Ischemic stroke patients who undergo intra-arterial treatment without general anesthesia have a lower risk of postoperative adverse events and less short-term neurological damage. In routine and non-emergency situations, non-general anesthetic options may be more suitable for intra-arterial treatment, offering greater benefits to patients. In addition to this, the neuroprotective effects of anesthetic drugs should be considered more preoperatively and postoperatively.

Keywords

• Stroke
• Intra-arterial therapy
• General anesthesia
• Local anesthesia
• Conscious sedation