• J. Vasc. Surg. · Nov 2011

    Multicenter Study Comparative Study

    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.

    • Matthew S Edwards, Jeanette S Andrews, Angela F Edwards, Racheed J Ghanami, Matthew A Corriere, Philip P Goodney, Christopher J Godshall, and Kimberley J Hansen.
    • Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA. medwards@wfubmc.edu
    • J. Vasc. Surg. 2011 Nov 1;54(5):1273-82.

    BackgroundThis 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.MethodsElective 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.ResultsWe 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.ConclusionsIn 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.Copyright © 2011 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.