General Anesthesia vs. Local Anesthesia During Endovascular Treatment for Acute Large Vessel Occlusion: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Abstract

Objective: To date, no consensus still exists on the anesthesia strategy of endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to large vessel occlusion (LVO). We aimed to compare the 90-day outcomes, puncture-to-recanalization time (PRT), successful recanalization rate, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) of patients undergoing general anesthesia (GA) or local anesthesia (LA) ± conscious sedation (CS) during the procedure. Methods: We selected patients from the Acute Ischemic Stroke Cooperation Group of Endovascular Treatment (ANGEL) registry and divided them into the GA group and the LA ± CS group. The two groups underwent 1:1 matching under propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. Then, we compared the primary outcome including the 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0–2, secondary outcome including the 90-day mRS, the 90-day mRS 0–1, the 90-day mRS 0–3, PRT, and successful recanalization rate as well as the safety outcome including sICH, any ICH, and 90-day mRS 6. Results: Among the 705 enrolled patients, 263 patients underwent GA and 442 patients underwent LA ± CS. After 1:1 PSM according to the baseline characteristics, each group has 216 patients. Patients with GA had the higher median 90-day mRS [3 (1–5) vs. 2 (1–4), p < 0.001], the lower 90-day mRS 0–2 rate (43.5 vs. 56.5%, p = 0.007), higher mortality (19.9 vs.10.2%, p = 0.005), and longer PRT [92 (60–140) vs. 70 (45–103) min, p < 0.001]. There were no differences in sICH and successful recanalization rate between both the groups. Conclusion: In the real-world setting, LA ± CS might provide more outcomes benefits than GA in patients with AIS-LVO during the procedure.