Effect of anesthesia strategy during endovascular therapy on 90-day outcomes in acute basilar artery occlusion: a retrospective observational study

The research on the effect of anesthesia on endovascular therapy (EVT) of acute ischemic stroke is mainly focused on the anterior circulation, and little is known about the data of basilar artery occlusion (BAO). This study aims to investigate the association of anesthesia strategy with 90-day clinical outcomes of patients with acute BAO treated with EVT.

We reviewed our prospectively collected data from the endovascular treatment database at the Beijing Tiantan Hospital. This included patients with acute BAO who had a documented 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score from January 2012 to July 2018. Options for EVT included general anesthesia (GA) and conscious sedation (CS) performed by an anesthesia care team in the institution. The recommendation of anesthesia for patients was a joint decision between anesthesiologist and neurointerventionalist according to a pre-designed scheme. Patients who required tracheal intubation for airway protection prior to EVT were excluded. The clinical outcomes we observed were functional independence (mRS ≤2), favorable outcome (mRS ≤3), and mortality at 90 days after the procedure. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to explore the relationship between anesthesia methods and 90-day outcomes.

A total of 187 patients with BAO were treated by EVT in this study. Nine cases requiring emergent intubation prior to EVT were excluded. 139 patients (78.1%) underwent GA and 39 patients (21.9%) underwent CS. In univariate analysis, GA was associated with less functional independence [odds ratio (OR), 0.28; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.13–0.59] and less favorable outcome (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.10–0.52) than was CS. After adjusting for potential confounders, multivariable analysis showed that there were still significant differences between GA and CS in functional independence (OR, 0.31; 95%CI, 0.10–0.97) and favorable outcome (OR, 0.24; 95%CI, 0.07–0.75).

Our retrospective analysis suggested that the anesthesia strategy may affect outcome, in which general anesthesia may result in less favorable outcomes. Nevertheless, future multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.