Apr
20

Anaesthetic Management of the Patient With Acute Ischaemic Stroke

Z. H. Anastasian

Br J Anaesth. 2014;113(S2):ii9-ii16.

Abstract and Introduction

Abstract

Anaesthetic management of the acute stroke patient demands consideration of the penumbra as the central focus. Recent studies have shown that patients who receive general anaesthesia for endovascular therapy for acute ischaemic stroke have worse outcomes than those who receive local anaesthesia. Although baseline condition of the patients in these studies differed, we should heed the warnings evident in the results. ‘Time is brain’: therapy should be quickly provided. Arterial pressure should be monitored carefully upon induction, avoiding a drastic reduction, and allowing for a reduction in arterial pressure upon recanalization. Keeping these factors in mind, anaesthetic technique (general, monitored anaesthesia care, or local) must be selected considering the individual patient’s risks and benefits. Unfortunately, there are no proven neuroprotective strategies to date for use in acute ischaemic stroke.

Introduction

Acute stroke is the second leading cause of death worldwide and the leading cause of long-term disability.[1] Ischaemic stroke is responsible for 87% of strokes.[2] In acute ischaemic strokes, an embolus, thrombus, or stenosis can decrease brain perfusion. The goal of early therapy for acute ischaemic stroke is to restore perfusion. I.V. thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) is the only proven medical therapy shown to improve patient outcomes in acute ischaemic stroke, with better outcomes achieved with earlier administration.[3,4] Patients who present within 4.5 h of stroke symptom onset and have no contraindications to therapy should be treated with i.v. rtPA.[5] However, only 3–8.5% of all stroke patients are treated with i.v. rtPA.[6] In addition, treatment with i.v. rtPA is unsuccessful in achieving recanalization in over half of patients with large-artery occlusions.[7] Patients who are not eligible for i.v. rtPA due to delayed time to presentation, contraindications to i.v. rtPA therapy (recent surgery or coagulopathy), or failed i.v. rtPA can be considered for endovascular therapy. Although recent data from randomized clinical trials suggest that endovascular therapy was not superior to i.v. rtPA,[8,9] studies show intra-arterial thrombolysis or mechanical clot-removing devices to be efficacious for recanalization and restoration of cerebral blood flow.[10–12]

This article reviews the current body of literature on the anaesthetic management of the acute ischaemic stroke patient, with a focus on the recent literature comparing outcomes after endovascular therapy performed with general compared with local anaesthesia, the importance of avoiding a time delay in treatment, the recent literature involving haemodynamic management of the acute stroke patient, and potentially neuroprotective strategies.

Anaesthetic Technique and Outcomes

There has recently been an increased interest in evaluating the relationship between type of anaesthesia a patient receives during endovascular therapy for stroke and outcomes. General anaesthesia can offer the benefits of immobility, pain control, and airway protection. The major disadvantages of general anaesthesia include haemodynamic changes with intubation, the possibility of delaying time to recanalization, pulmonary aspiration, and the requirement for additional workforce. Local anaesthesia or sedation (including monitored anaesthesia care) can maintain smoother haemodynamics due to the decreased administration of pharmacological vasodilators, and allow intra-procedural clinical neurological evaluation. But these approaches have the disadvantages of the lack of airway protection, continued patient movement, uncontrolled pain and agitation, and a prolonged procedure time. While the choice of anaesthetic technique can be individualized based on the needs of each patient, the anaesthesiologist monitors and provides airway support to assure proper oxygenation, haemodynamic support to assure proper perfusion of the penumbra, and potentially immobility in the confused and agitated patient to provide better working conditions for revascularization ().

Table 1.  General anaesthesia or local anaesthesia forendovascular therapy after acute ischaemic stroke

General anaesthesia Local anaesthesia
Pros Pros
   Immobility    Smoother haemodynamics
   Pain control    Intra-procedural neurological evaluation
   Airway protection
Cons Cons
   Haemodynamic changes    Lack of airway protection
   Additional workforce    Patient movement possible
   Potential of time delay before start of procedure    Uncontrolled pain and agitation
   Prolonged procedure time

In 2010, three studies[13–15] and multiple editorials[16–18] were published, evaluating outcomes and anaesthetic technique. Jumaa and colleagues performed a retrospective, single-centre study of 126 patients undergoing endovascular procedures for acute ischaemic stroke. They reported that intubated patients had longer intensive care unit stays, increased in-hospital mortality, worse clinical outcome, and larger final infarct volume size. However, the clinical conditions of the intubated patients differed from those not intubated before endovascular therapy in having significantly higher baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores.[13] Nichols and colleagues reviewed the anaesthetic management of 75 patients in the Interventional Management of Stroke (IMS) II trial with anterior circulation stroke who underwent angiography with or without intra-arterial treatment. They categorized the anaesthetic management into four levels (no sedation, mild sedation, heavy sedation, and pharmacological paralysis). They found that the group of patients who received no sedation had relatively good outcome (modified Rankin score of 0–2), lower death rates, and higher reperfusion rates. Patients who received more sedation also had higher baseline NIHSS scores.[14] Abou-Chebl and colleagues performed a large (980 patients) retrospective multicentre (12 centres) study, which found that general anaesthesia during an endovascular procedure for anterior circulation ischaemic stroke was an independent predictor for poor outcome. Similarly, patients who received a general anaesthetic had higher baseline NIHSS scores and were more likely to have carotid terminus occlusions.[15]

More recently, studies have included arterial pressure measurements in evaluating the relationship between general anaesthesia and poor outcomes after endovascular therapy for acute ischaemic stroke. Davis and colleagues performed a retrospective single-centre study of 96 patients undergoing endovascular therapy for acute ischaemic stroke and also found an association between general anaesthesia and poor outcomes (15% probability of good outcomes compared with 60% in the local anaesthesia group). Patients who underwent general anaesthesia had higher baseline NIHSS scores than those given local anaesthesia. However, the investigators also found an association of good outcomes with systolic arterial pressure (SAP) >140 mm Hg. There was a correlation between low arterial pressure (defined as the minimum pressure recorded) and general anaesthesia.[19] Abou-Chebl and colleagues reviewed the North American SOLITAIRE Stent-Retriever Acute Stroke (NASA) Registry to compare the outcomes of patients receiving general anaesthesia with those receiving sedation.[20] They included data from 281 patients from 18 sites that described anaesthesia type, and grouped patients into general anaesthesia (if they were intubated) or local anaesthesia (if they were not intubated, regardless of whether or not they received sedation). Patients who received general anaesthesia had higher baseline NIHSS score and lower baseline arterial pressures. In a multivariate analysis, hypertension, NIHSS score, unsuccessful revascularization, non-utilization of balloon guide catheter, and general anaesthesia were associated with mortality. The relationship between general anaesthesia and worse outcomes persisted when they excluded patients who arrived intubated (and were intubated emergently) and those who had posterior circulation strokes.[20] More recently, Rai and colleagues published an abstract that showed that although general anaesthesia was associated with higher patient mortality, it was not an independent predictor of outcome when baseline NIHSS score, age, and recanalization were taken into account. In addition, the interval between arrival and groin puncture was higher in patients with general anaesthesia. They also found a higher difference in pre- and post-SAP was associated with a worse outcome in patients with general anaesthesia[21] ().

Table 2.  Studies on general compared with regional anaesthesia for endovascular therapy for acute stroke. ICH, intracranial haemorrhage

Study Patients Anaesthetic management Outcomes Limitations
Jumaa and colleagues13 Retrospective, single centre, 126 patients with acute ischaemic stroke Intubated or not intubated Intubated patients had longer ICU stays, increased in-hospital mortality, worse clinical outcome, larger final infarct size Intubated patients had higher baseline NIHSS scores
Nichols and colleagues14 Retrospective, 75 patients enrolled in IMS II trial with anterior circulation stroke No sedation, mild sedation, heavy sedation, pharmacological paralysis Lower sedation was associated with good outcome (modified Rankin score of 0–2), lower mortality and higher successful reperfusion rates Patients with more sedation had higher baseline NIHSS scores and had less successful angiography reperfusion rates
Abou-Chebl and colleagues15 Retrospective, multicentre, 980 patients General anaesthesia or conscious sedation Independent predictors of poor outcome and mortality: age, NIHSS, general anaesthesia, recanalization, ICH, carotid terminus occlusion. Predictors of poor outcome: no stent placed Patients with general anaesthesia had higher baseline NIHSS scores and were more likely to have carotid terminus occlusions
Davis and colleagues19 Retrospective, single centre, 96 patients General anaesthesia or local anaesthesia (local anaesthesia includes light sedation with midazolam and fentanyl, if needed, provided by the stroke neurologist) Independent predictors for good outcomes are: local anaesthesia, low baseline stroke scores, and systolic pressure >140 mm Hg.

General anaesthesia is correlated with low arterial pressures

 Patients with general anaesthesia had higher baseline NIHSS scores

Good outcomes were associated high higher arterial pressures
Abou-Chebl and colleagues20 Retrospective, multicentre (18 sites), 281 patients General anaesthesia (intubated) or local anaesthesia (not intubated, but unknown if sedated) Independent predictors of mortality: hypertension, NIHSS, unsuccessful revascularization, non-utilization of balloon guide catheter, and general anaesthesia Patients who received general anaesthesia had higher baseline NIHSS and lower baseline arterial pressures
Rai and colleagues (abstract)21 Retrospective, single centre, 190 patients General anaesthesia or non-general anaesthesia (both monitored anaesthesia care and local) General anaesthesia is not an independent factor when NIHSS, age and recanalization are included. Arrival to puncture time is longer with general anaesthesia andarterial pressure variations are larger with general anaesthesia Patients who received general anaesthesia had higher baseline NIHSS. Arrival to time to puncture time was longer with general anaesthesia

Unfortunately, to date, there are no randomized controlled clinical trials and no prospectively collected data specific to anaesthetic management of endovascular treatment of acute ischaemic stroke. Studies that have been published include patients who have different baseline characteristics. In addition, in most studies, the types of anaesthesia often are classified as ‘general anaesthesia’ or ‘intubated’ vs ‘local anaesthesia’ or ‘not intubated’. This binary stratification excludes haemodynamic management, depth of sedation, and the presence of anaesthesiologist.

The topic and study results are important and more data are necessary: the induction of general anaesthesia in each individual patient has individual risks and benefits, and as Molina and Selim[16] summarized can become a choice of general anaesthesia, ‘sailing quietly in the darkness’, or local anaesthesia, sailing ‘fast under a daylight storm’.

The results of these studies and the differences between the groups that received general anaesthesia, sedation, or local anaesthesia suggest several hypotheses as to why patients who have general anaesthesia have worse outcomes. First, patients who have general anaesthesia in every study are ‘sicker’ at baseline by NIHSS scores. Even after correcting for this ‘sicker’ patient status, selection bias is inherent in any retrospective study. In addition, patients who received general anaesthesia had, in certain centres, longer time from arrival to groin puncture.[21] Finally, patients who received general anaesthesia had lower arterial pressures recorded, including baseline[20] and lowest recorded,[19] and had greater arterial pressure fluctuations.[21]

Time Is Brain

A survey of members of the Society for Vascular and Interventional Neurology (SVIN) found that interventional surgeons felt the most important limitation of general anaesthesia and the main reason for not preferring it for all cases was time delay.[22] Time delay to therapy is indeed a major concern in therapy for the patient with acute ischaemic stroke. The target of therapy in acute ischaemic stroke is the ischaemic penumbra, which is the threatened but salvageable tissue surrounding the infarct core. The ischaemic penumbra is short-lived, lasting only for a few hours in human patients.[23] The typical ischaemic stroke patient loses 1.9 million neurones for each minute they are untreated. Compared with the normal rate of neurone loss in brain ageing, the ischaemic brain ages 3.6 yr each hour without treatment.[24] Recanalization of occluded arteries is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for achieving good clinical outcomes with endovascular therapy. If the entire tissue at risk has already progressed to irreversible infarction, reperfusion will be futile, and can even cause harm by increasing the risk of haemorrhagic transformation.

Although induction of general anaesthesia and the involvement of an anaesthesia care team could conceivably delay endovascular treatment of acute ischaemic stroke, most studies show no difference in time from patient arrival to treatment for patients receiving general anaesthesia or local anaesthesia.[14,15,19,20] A single institutional study did find a significantly longer arrival to groin puncture time in patients who received general anaesthesia.[21] In contrast, interventional procedure time has been noted to be less for patients who receive general anaesthesia.[13] Although this is true in reported studies, there can be substantial variability between institutions. It is critical to remember the race to save the penumbra and avoid delay of therapy.

Haemodynamic Management

More than 60% of patients who present with ischaemic stroke have elevated arterial pressures.[25,26] The elevated systemic arterial pressures are due, in part, to baseline hypertension. In addition to baseline hypertension, there exists a superimposed early hypertensive response to brain ischaemia. Potential mechanisms behind this response include the Cushing response to a mass effect of oedema,[27] autoregulation response in a hypertensive patient,[28] and neuroendocrine response to physiological stress.[29] Within the first 24 h after stroke, arterial pressure declines by about 25% in most patients.[30] Presentation with high systemic arterial pressure at the time on ischaemic stroke is associated with poor outcome.[31] In addition, presentation with low systemic arterial pressure at the time of ischaemic stroke is also associated with poor outcome. Data from the International Stroke Trial suggest that the relationship between arterial pressure at the time of acute ischaemic stroke and outcomes is a U-shaped curve, with both low arterial pressure and high arterial pressure increasing death and dependency, with the lowest risk of death or dependency at a systolic arterial pressure of 150 mm Hg.[32]

Optimal management of the acute ischaemic stroke patient with hypertension is unclear. Lowering arterial pressure should reduce cerebral oedema and decrease probability of haemorrhagic transformation of the infarct. However, lowering arterial pressure might potentially decrease collateral flow in the penumbral area, especially in the setting of ischaemia and impaired autoregulation.[25] Animal data show that hypertension induced upon cerebral artery occlusion improves local cerebral blood flow[33] and decreases infarct volume.[34] In an animal model of chronic hypertension, maintaining arterial pressure resulted in animals with increased regional blood flow, decreased oedema, decreased stroke volume, and improved neurological scores.[35] In humans, arterial pressure elevation during carotid occlusion during a carotid endartectomy has been shown to improve postoperative cognitive function.[36] A Cochrane meta-analysis through 2008 identified 12 randomized trials that included 1153 patients with stroke, and concluded there was insufficient evidence to evaluate the effect of altering arterial pressure on patient outcomes.[37]

Three large, prospective trials focused on arterial pressure management in the time interval after stroke. The COSSACS trial randomized 763 patients who presented within 48 h of stroke (only 5% haemorrhagic) to either continue their chronic pre-stroke antihypertensive therapy or to temporarily discontinue antihypertensive medications for the first 2 weeks after stroke. There was no difference at 2 weeks in the rate of death or dependency. The study was stopped before target recruitment due to slow recruitment and lack of funding, and therefore the study was potentially underpowered.[38] The SCAST trial randomized 2029 patients within 30 h of stroke (~85% ischaemic, 15% haemorrhagic) and a SAP >140 mm Hg to receive an angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) or placebo for 7 days. Additional antihypertensive medications were received by more than one-quarter of enrolled patients. The study showed that there was no indication that ARB therapy was beneficial to the endpoints death, myocardial infarction, or recurrent stroke at a 6 month time point. In fact, there was a higher risk of poor functional outcome in patients who received an ARB.[39] The CATIS trial randomized 4071 patients who presented within 48 h of ischaemic stroke and had elevated SAP. Two thousand and thirty-eight patients assigned to the intervention group received antihypertensive therapy to decrease SAP by 10–25% within the first 24 h after randomization, and achieved arterial pressure <140/90 mm Hg within 7 days, maintaining this during hospitalization. Two thousand and thirty-three were assigned to the control group that had all antihypertensive medication discontinued. Patients who received thrombolysis were excluded. There was no significant difference in death or major disability at 14 days or discharge, or in composite death and major disability at 3 months post-treatment. Subgroup analysis showed that time to treatment did affect the primary outcome, with patients who were enrolled more than 24 h after stroke having significantly better outcomes in the treatment arm. These data favour the use of lowering arterial pressure after 24 h, when the impact of arterial pressure on the penumbra is decreased. Limitations of the study include an open-label intervention that can introduce rater bias, exclusion of cervicocerebral disease, an ethnically Chinese population, and a median time to randomization of 15 h.[40]

Recently, the Efficacy of Nitric Oxide trial (ENOS) finished recruitment of 4011 patients with a new onset motor deficit, SAP between 140 and 220 mm Hg, and presenting within 48 h of onset of symptoms. Patients were randomized to treatment with transdermal glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) (5 mg for 1 h daily) for 7 days or no GTN. Patients with a history of prior antihypertensive treatment were randomized independently into continuing their treatment or stopping it. The primary outcome measure was combined death and dependency. Secondary outcome measures were arterial pressure over 7 days of treatment, death/impairment, recurrence, quality of life, and cognition. Results were presented at the 23rd European Stroke Conference. There was no significant change in primary outcome for patients who continued or stopped their antihypertensive medication. However, some secondary outcomes were better in patients who stopped taking their antihypertensive medication for the week after the stroke. In addition, there appeared to be a benefit in patients who were treated with GTN in the very early (<6 h) time frame.[41,42]

The ENCHANTED trial is an ongoing interventional, international, randomized trial started in 2012 designed to enrol 3300 patients presenting with acute ischaemic stroke confirmed by imaging within 4.5 h of onset of symptoms, and with SAP<185 mm Hg. Patients will be randomized to two arms: a low dose (0.6 mg kg−1]) rtPA compared with standard dose (0.9 mg kg−1) rtPA arm, and an intensive (target systolic pressure 140–150 mm Hg) lowering compared with standard guideline (target systolic pressure 180 mm Hg) arterial pressure management arm. The primary outcome will be measured in terms of combined death and disability 90 days after discharge. The secondary outcome measures will be occurrence of secondary intra-cerebral haemorrhage within 36 h of administration of rtPA, death and disability as separate measures at the end of 90 days, neurological deterioration, quality of life, and admission to residential care[43] ().

Table 3.  Haemodynamic management trials in acute stroke

Study Patients Methods Outcomes
Leonardi-Bee and colleagues32 17 398 patients from the international stroke trial with ischaemic stroke Analysis of data from patients in the randomized international stroke trial designed to evaluate aspirin and heparin use in acute stroke A U-shaped relationship was found between baseline arterial pressure and both early death and late death or dependency: both high arterial pressure and low arterial pressure were independent prognostic factors for poor outcome
COSSACS Robinson and colleagues38 763 patients within 48 h of stroke Randomized to:

Continue pre-stroke antihypertensive medications for 2 weeks

Stop pre-stroke antihypertensive medications for 2 weeks

 Primary outcome: no difference at 2 weeks in rate of death or dependency. Study stopped early due to slow recruitment and lack of funding
SCAST Sandset and colleagues39 2029 patients within 30 h of stroke with systolic arterial pressure >140 mm Hg Randomized to:

Receive ARB for 7 days

Receive placebo for 7 days

 Primary outcome: ARB therapy not beneficial to composite vascular endpoint

Secondary outcome: Higher risk of poor functional outcome in patients who received ARB
CATIS He and colleagues40 4071 patients within 48 h of ischaemic stroke and had elevated systolic arterial pressure Randomized to:

Decrease arterial pressure by 10–25% within 24 h, achieve arterial pressure <140/90 within 7 days, and maintaining it during hospitalization

Discontinue antihypertensives

 Primary outcome: no significant difference in death and major disability at 14 days or discharge, or in composite death and major disability at 3 months post-treatment

Subgroup analysis: time to treatment did affect the primary outcome, with patients who were enrolled more than 24 h after stroke having significantly better outcomes in the treatment arm
ENOS (recently completed) 4011 patients with a new onset motor deficit, systolic arterial pressure between 140 and 220 mm Hg and presenting within 48 h of onset of symptoms Randomized to:

Treatment with transdermal GTN for 7 days

No GTN

Patients with a history of prior antihypertensive treatment were randomized independently into continuing their treatment or stopping it

 Primary outcome: death and dependency: no significant change for patients who continued vs stopped their antihypertensive medication. Secondary outcomes: arterial pressure over 7 days of treatment, death/impairment, recurrence, quality of life, and cognition better in patients who stopped taking their antihypertensive medication for the week of the stroke

Subgroup analysis: potential benefit in patients who were treated with GTN in the very early (<6 h) time frame
ENCHANTED (ongoing) 3300 patients presenting with acute ischaemic stroke confirmed by imaging, within 4.5 h of onset of symptoms, and with systolic arterial pressure <185 mm Hg Patients will be randomized in two arms:

Low dose (0.6 mg kg−1) rtPA arm

Standard dose (0.9 mg kg−1) rtPA arm

Intensive (target systolic arterial pressure 140–150 mm Hg) lowering arm

Standard guideline (target systolic arterial pressure 180 mm Hg) management arm

 Primary outcome: death and disability 90 days after discharge.

Secondary outcome: secondary intra-cerebral haemorrhage within 36 h of administration of rtPA, death and disability as separate measures at the end of 90 days, neurological deterioration, quality of life, and admission to residential care

The question of how arterial pressure should be managed in early ischaemic stroke, especially when there is still substantial penumbral, tissue at-risk remains unanswered by the current body of literature. A potential strategy for management supported by current literature is to avoid lowering arterial pressure dramatically during the first 12 h after stroke onset, when collateral circulation compromise is still a concern. This time period likely includes the period in which an endovascular procedure might be attempted. The Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesia and Critical Care (SNACC) has recommended that systolic arterial pressure should be maintained >140 mm Hg (fluids and vasopressors) and <180 mm Hg (with or without i.v. rtPA), and diastolic arterial pressure <105 mm Hg (class IIa, level of evidence B). After successful recanalization, arterial pressure targets should be adjusted to avoid potential haemorrhagic conversion.[44]

Future Directions: Neuroprotective Strategies

A considerable amount of research has been invested into the development of potential neuroprotective agents: ideally one that would be administered in the field immediately after stroke to get maximum penetration into ischaemic tissue and the penumbra. Multiple neuroprotective treatments have been identified that show great promise in animal models of stroke. Unfortunately, nearly all have failed to provide protection in human trials. In a study of 178 acute stroke trials performed in the 20th century, 49 involved promising neuroprotective agents that emerged from preclinical stroke studies and entered human testing. One hundred and fourteen clinical trials were performed with more than 21 000 patients. Every agent tested failed.[45]

Anaesthetic agents, including thiopental, isoflurane, sevoflurane, and xenon, have also been investigated for their neuroprotective effects.[46] While animal data[47,48] and human data for cardiopulmonary bypass[49]have shown promise, and studies are ongoing to evaluate the possibility of neuroprotection,[50] there is no human evidence for the neuroprotective effects of anaesthesia in focal ischaemia.[46]

Magnesium has shown promise for neuroprotection during carotid endartectomy[51] and cardiac bypass surgery.[52] The potential use of magnesium in acute stroke is being investigated in the recently completed FAST-MAG Phase 3 trial. The goal of the trial was to enrol patients at an early time period to administer magnesium while it could have an effect on the penumbra. Patients were enrolled in the field within 2 h of onset of symptoms, received a 4 g bolus of magnesium sulphate i.v. over 15 min, followed by a 16 g maintenance infusion in hospital over 24 h.[53]

Hypothermia has been shown to be neuroprotective in experimental and focal hypoxic brain injury models.[54] Hypothermia decreases cerebral metabolism, suppresses glutamate release, reduces neuroinflammatory response, disrupts apoptotic pathways, reduces free radical generation, and minimizes oedema formation.[55] Mild to moderate hypothermia is associated with improved neurological outcome among patients with cardiac arrest, which resulted in hypothermia becoming the first neuroprotective strategy to be recommended by the American Heart Association in comatose patients after cardiac arrest.[56,57] In addition, hypothermia has been shown to reduce mortality without increasing major disability in term and late preterm newborns with hypoxic–ischaemic encephalopathy. In 2010, the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation recommended therapeutic hypothermia be offered to term or near-term infants with moderate to severe encephalopathy.[58,59] However, in the investigation of mild hypothermia in the setting of potential focal ischaemia, the IHAST trial, a multicentre clinical trial, found that mild hypothermia administered during surgery for treatment of a ruptured intracranial aneurysm did not improve outcome after neurosurgical aneurysm clipping.[60]

Pilot clinical trials to date have been designed to establish the safety and feasibility of various cooling techniques in stroke patients. No study has had sufficient sample size to provide results.[61,62] Two ongoing clinical trials are assessing the efficacy of therapeutic hypothermia in acute ischaemic stroke. The Intravascular Cooling in the Treatment of Stroke (ICTuS) 2/3 study was designed to compare the safety and clinical benefit of endovascular hypothermia and thrombolysis compared with thrombolysis alone. The projected enrolment is 1600 patients in multiple centres presenting within 3 h of stroke who are eligible to receive rtPA.[63]The EuroHYP-1 trial is targeted to enrol 1500 patients presenting within 6 h of stroke symptoms and will randomize them to hypothermia and best medical treatment or best medical treatment alone.[64]

Without conclusive evidence that hypothermia is beneficial in acute ischaemic stroke in adults, current recommendations are to maintain normothermia and to treat patients with antipyretics if febrile.[44]

Conclusions

In a patient with acute ischaemic stroke, time is of the essence to save the vulnerable penumbra. With the current evidence, the decision between general anaesthesia, monitored anaesthesia care, or local anaesthesia for endovascular procedures should be made with the individual risks and benefits of each patient considered. Arterial pressure should be monitored carefully upon induction of anaesthesia and induction should be expedient to allow for timely endovascular intervention if possible. Target arterial pressures should be systolic readings of 140–180 mm Hg with a reduction in pressure upon recanalization. Unfortunately, there are no proven neuroprotective strategies to date for ischaemic stroke.

Sidebar

Editor’s Key Points

  • Anaesthetic management for endovascular treatment of acute ischaemic stroke has been shown to affect outcome.
  • General anaesthesia can result in worse outcomes compared with local anaesthesia, although technique must be tailored to patient-specific variables.
  • Time to reperfusion and arterial pressure are critical in maximizing survival of the ischaemic penumbra.

References

  1. Lozano R, Naghavi M, Foreman K, et al. Globalandregional mortality from235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet2012; 380: 2095–128
  2. Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics—2014 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2014; 129: e28–292
  3. Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HPJr, et al. Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2013; 44: 870–947
  4. Saver JL, Fonarow GC, Smith EE, et al. Time to treatment with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator and outcome from acute ischemic stroke. J Am Med Assoc 2013; 309: 2480–8
  5. Del Zoppo GJ, Saver JL, Jauch EC, Adams HP Jr, American Heart Association Stroke Council. Expansion of the time window for treatment of acute ischemic stroke with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator: a science advisory from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2009; 40: 2945–8
  6. Reeves MJ, Arora S, Broderick JP, et al. Acute stroke care in the US: results from 4 pilot prototypes of the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Registry. Stroke 2005; 36: 1232–40
  7. Rha JH, Saver JL. The impact of recanalization on ischemic stroke outcome: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2007; 38: 967–73
  8. Broderick JP, Palesch YY, Demchuk AM, et al. Endovascular therapy after intravenous t-PA versus t-PA alone for stroke. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 893–903
  9. Ciccone A, Valvassori L, Investigators SE. Endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 2433–4
  10. Nogueira RG, Smith WS, Sung G, et al. Effect of time to reperfusion on clinical outcome of anterior circulation strokes treated with thrombectomy: pooled analysis of the MERCI and Multi MERCI trials. Stroke2011; 42: 3144–9
  11. Fields JD, Lutsep HL, Smith WS, Investigators MMM. Higher degrees of recanalization after mechanical thrombectomy for acute stroke are associated with improved outcome and decreased mortality: pooled analysis of the MERCI and Multi MERCI trials. Am J Neuroradiol 2011; 32: 2170–4
  12. Smith WS, Sung G, Saver J, et al. Mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke: final results of the Multi MERCI trial. Stroke 2008; 39: 1205–12
  13. Jumaa MA, Zhang F, Ruiz-Ares G, et al. Comparison of safety and clinical and radiographic outcomes in endovascular acute stroke therapy for proximal middle cerebral artery occlusion with intubation and general anesthesia versus the nonintubated state. Stroke 2010; 41: 1180–4
  14. Nichols C, Carrozzella J, Yeatts S, Tomsick T, Broderick J, Khatri P. Is periprocedural sedation during acute stroke therapy associated with poorer functional outcomes? J Neurointerventional Surg 2010; 2: 67–70
  15. Abou-Chebl A, Lin R, Hussain MS, et al. Conscious sedation versus general anesthesia during endovascular therapy for acute anterior circulation stroke: preliminary results from a retrospective, multicenter study. Stroke 2010; 41: 1175–9
  16. Molina CA, Selim MH. General or localanesthesia duringendovascular procedures: sailing quiet in the darkness or fast under a daylight storm. Stroke 2010; 41: 2720–1
  17. Gupta R. Local is better than general anesthesia during endovascular acute stroke interventions. Stroke 2010; 41: 2718–9
  18. Brekenfeld C, Mattle HP, Schroth G. General is better than local anesthesia during endovascular procedures. Stroke 2010; 41:2716–7
  19. Davis MJ, Menon BK, Baghirzada LB, et al. Anesthetic management and outcome in patients during endovascular therapy for acute stroke. Anesthesiology 2012; 116: 396–405
  20. Abou-Chebl A, Zaidat OO, Castonguay AC, et al. North American SOLITAIRE Stent-Retriever Acute Stroke Registry: choice of anesthesia and outcomes. Stroke 2014; 45: 1396–401
  21. Rai A, Boo S, Domico J, Roberts T, Carpenter J. E-026 time and pressure—possible reasons behind worse outcomes for GETA patients undergoing stroke interventions. J Neurointerventional Surg2014;6(Suppl. 1): A49
  22. McDonagh DL, Olson DM, Kalia JS, Gupta R, Abou-Chebl A, ZaidatOO. Anesthesia and sedation practices among neurointerventionalists during acute ischemic stroke endovascular therapy. Front Neurol 2010; 1: 118
  23. Saver JL. The 2012 Feinberg Lecture: treatment swiftand treatment sure. Stroke 2013; 44: 270–7
  24. Saver JL. Time is brain—quantified. Stroke 2006; 37: 263–6
  25. Alqadri SL, Sreenivasan V, Qureshi AI. Acute hypertensive response management in patients with acute stroke. Curr Cardiol Rep 2013;15: 426
  26. Qureshi AI, Ezzeddine MA, Nasar A, et al. Prevalence of elevated blood pressure in 563,704 adult patients with stroke presenting to the ED in the United States. Am J Emerg Med 2007; 25: 32–8
  27. Patarroyo SX, Anderson C. Blood pressure lowering in acute phaseof stroke: latest evidence and clinical implications. Ther Adv Chronic Dis 2012; 3: 163–71
  28. Qureshi AI. Acute hypertensive response in patients with stroke: pathophysiology and management. Circulation 2008; 118: 176–87
  29. Saver JL. Blood pressure management in early ischemic stroke. J Am Med Assoc 2014; 311: 469–70
  30. Oliveira-Filho J, Silva SC, Trabuco CC, Pedreira BB, Sousa EU, Bacellar A. Detrimental effect of blood pressure reduction in the first 24 hours of acute stroke onset. Neurology 2003; 61: 1047–51
  31. Willmot M, Leonardi-Bee J, Bath PM. High blood pressure in acute stroke and subsequent outcome: asystematic review.Hypertension 2004; 43: 18–24
  32. Leonardi-Bee J, Bath PM, Phillips SJ, Sandercock PA, Group ISTC. Blood pressure and clinical outcomes in the International Stroke Trial. Stroke 2002; 33: 1315–20
  33. Drummond JC, Oh YS, Cole DJ, Shapiro HM. Phenylephrine-induced hypertension reducesischemiafollowing middle cerebral arteryocclusion in rats. Stroke 1989; 20: 1538–44
  34. Ishikawa S, Ito H, Yokoyama K, Makita K. Phenylephrine ameliorates cerebral cytotoxic edema and reduces cerebral infarction volume in a rat model of complete unilateral carotid artery occlusion with severe hypotension. Anesth Analg 2009; 108: 1631–7
  35. Kang BT, Leoni RF, Kim DE, Silva AC. Phenylephrine-induced hypertension during transient middle cerebral artery occlusion alleviates ischemic brain injury in spontaneously hypertensive rats. Brain Res 2012; 1477: 83–91
  36. Heyer EJ, Mergeche JL, Anastasian ZH, Kim M, Mallon KA, Connolly ES. Arterial blood pressure management during carotid endarterectomy and early cognitive dysfunction. Neurosurgery 2014; 74: 245–51; discussion 51–3
  37. Geeganage C, Bath PM. Interventions for deliberately altering blood pressure in acute stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; CD000039
  38. Robinson TG, Potter JF, Ford GA, et al. Effects of antihypertensive treatment after acute stroke in the Continue or Stop Post-Stroke Antihypertensives Collaborative Study (COSSACS): a prospective, randomised, open, blinded-endpoint trial. Lancet Neurol 2010; 9: 767–75
  39. Sandset EC, Bath PM, Boysen G, et al. The angiotensin-receptor blockercandesartan for treatmentof acute stroke(SCAST): arandomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. Lancet 2011; 377: 741–50
  40. He J, Zhang Y, Xu T, et al. Effects ofimmediate blood pressure reduction on death and major disability in patients with acute ischemic stroke: the CATIS randomized clinical trial. J Am Med Assoc 2014; 311: 479–89
  41. Guyler P. News from the 23rd European Stroke Conference. Br J Cardiol 2014; 21: 102. Available from http://bjcardio.co.uk/2014/07/news-from-the-23rd-european-stroke-conference
  42. Investigators ET. Glyceryl trinitrate vs. control, and continuing vs. stopping temporarily prior antihypertensive therapy, in acute stroke: rationale and design of the Efficacy of Nitric Oxide in Stroke (ENOS) trial (ISRCTN99414122). Int J Stroke 2006; 1: 245–9
  43. Institute G. Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study (ENCHANTED). ClinicalTrialsgov. 2014. Available from http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01422616?view=results
  44. Talke PO, Sharma D, Heyer EJ, Bergese SD, Blackham KA, Stevens RD. Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care Expert consensus statement: anesthetic management of endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke: endorsed by the Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery and the Neurocritical Care Society. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2014; 26: 95–108
  45. Kidwell CS, Liebeskind DS, Starkman S, Saver JL. Trends in acute ischemic stroke trials through the 20th century. Stroke 2001; 32: 1349–59
  46. Froehler MT, Fifi JT, Majid A, Bhatt A, Ouyang M, McDonagh DL. Anesthesia for endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Neurology 2012; 79(13 Suppl. 1): S167–73
  47. Sakai H, Sheng H, Yates RB, Ishida K, Pearlstein RD, Warner DS. Isoflurane provides long-term protection against focal cerebral ischemia in the rat. Anesthesiology 2007; 106: 92–9; discussion 8–10
  48. Hobbs C, Thoresen M, Tucker A, Aquilina K, Chakkarapani E, Dingley J. Xenon and hypothermia combine additively, offering long-term functional and histopathologic neuroprotection after neonatal hypoxia/ischemia. Stroke 2008; 39: 1307–13
  49. Nussmeier NA, Arlund C, Slogoff S. Neuropsychiatric complications after cardiopulmonary bypass: cerebral protection bya barbiturate. Anesthesiology 1986; 64: 165–70
  50. Dingley J, Tooley J, Liu X, et al. Xenon ventilation during therapeutic hypothermia in neonatal encephalopathy: a feasibility study. Pediatrics 2014; 133: 809–18
  51. Mack WJ, Kellner CP, Sahlein DH, et al. Intraoperative magnesium infusion during carotid endarterectomy: a double-blind placebo-controlled trial. J Neurosurg 2009; 110: 961–7
  52. Bhudia SK, Cosgrove DM, Naugle RI, et al.Magnesium asaneuroprotectant in cardiac surgery: a randomized clinical trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006; 131: 853–61
  53. Saver JL, Starkman S, Eckstein M, et al. Methodologyof the Field Administration of Stroke Therapy-Magnesium (FAST-MAG) phase 3 trial: part 1—rationale and general methods. Int J Stroke 2014; 9: 215–9
  54. Yenari MA, HanHS. Neuroprotective mechanismsof hypothermia in brain ischaemia. Nat Rev Neurosci 2012; 13: 267–78
  55. Wu TC, Grotta JC. Hypothermia for acute ischaemic stroke. Lancet Neurol 2013; 12: 275–84
  56. Nolan JP, Neumar RW, Adrie C, et al. Post-cardiac arrest syndrome: epidemiology, pathophysiology, treatment, and prognostication. A Scientific Statement from the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation; the American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee; the Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia; the Council on Cardiopulmonary, Perioperative, and Critical Care; the Council on Clinical Cardiology; the Council on Stroke. Resuscitation2008; 79: 350–79
  57. Hypothermia after Cardiac Arrest Study Group. Mild therapeutic hypothermia to improve the neurologic outcome after cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 549–56
  58. Wyllie J, Perlman JM, Kattwinkel J, et al. Part 11: Neonatal resuscitation: 2010 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations. Resuscitation 2010; 81(Suppl. 1): e260–87
  59. Jacobs SE, Berg M, Hunt R, Tarnow-Mordi WO, Inder TE, Davis PG. Cooling for newborns with hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 1: CD003311
  60. Todd MM, Hindman BJ, Clarke WR, Torner JC, Intraoperative Hypothermia for Aneurysm Surgery Trial I. Mild intraoperative hypothermia during surgery for intracranial aneurysm. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 135–45
  61. De Georgia MA, Krieger DW, Abou-Chebl A, et al. Cooling for Acute Ischemic BrainDamage(COOL AID): afeasibility trial of endovascular cooling. Neurology 2004; 63: 312–7
  62. Lyden PD, Allgren RL, Ng K, et al. Intravascular Cooling in the Treatment of Stroke (ICTuS): early clinical experience. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2005; 14: 107–14
  63. Lyden PD, Hemmen TM, Grotta J, Rapp K, Raman R. Endovascular therapeutic hypothermia for acute ischemic stroke: ICTuS 2/3 protocol. Int J Stroke 2014; 9: 117–25
  64. van der Worp HB, Macleod MR, Bath PM, et al. EuroHYP-1: European multicenter, randomized, phase III clinical trial of therapeutic hypothermia plus best medical treatment vs. best medical treatment alone for acute ischemic stroke. Int J Stroke 2014; 9: 642–5

Print Friendly

Tags: ,

Pubblicato da Dott. Luigi Vicari Anestesia Subscribe to RSS feed

Lascia un commento