Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34642940›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2021

Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.

Amaraporn Rerkasem, Saritphat Orrapin, Dominic Pj Howard, Sothida Nantakool, Kittipan Rerkasem

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Fast-Track Protocol for Carotid Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Amaraporn RerkasemEnvironmental - Occupational Health Sciences and Non Communicable Diseases Center of Excellence, Research Institute for Health Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Saritphat OrrapinDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Thammasat University (Rangsit Campus), Pathum Thani, Thailand.
Dominic Pj HowardCentre for Prevention of Stroke and Dementia, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sothida NantakoolEnvironmental - Occupational Health Sciences and Non Communicable Diseases Center of Excellence, Research Institute for Health Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Kittipan RerkasemEnvironmental - Occupational Health Sciences and Non Communicable Diseases Center of Excellence, Research Institute for Health Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCarotid endarterectomy may significantly reduce the risk of stroke in people with recently symptomatic, severe carotid artery stenosis. However, there are significant perioperative risks that may be minimised by performing the operation under local rather than general anaesthetics. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1996, and previously updated in 2004, 2008, and 2013.

objectivesTo determine whether carotid endarterectomy under local anaesthetic: 1) reduces the risk of perioperative stroke and death compared with general anaesthetic; 2) reduces the complication rate (other than stroke) following carotid endarterectomy; and 3) is acceptable to individuals and surgeons. SEARCH

methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers (to February 2021). We also reviewed reference lists of articles identified. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of local anaesthetics to general anaesthetics for people having carotid endarterectomy were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and evaluated quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) tool. We calculated a pooled Peto odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for the following outcomes that occurred within 30 days of surgery: stroke, death, ipsilateral stroke, stroke or death, myocardial infarction, local haemorrhage, and arteries shunted. MAIN

resultsWe included 16 RCTs involving 4839 participants, of which 3526 were obtained from the single largest trial (GALA). The main findings from our meta-analysis showed that, within 30 days of operation, neither incidence of stroke nor death were significantly different between local and general anaesthesia. Of these, the incidence of stroke in the local and general anaesthesia groups was 3.2% and 3.5%, respectively (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 1.26; P = 0.58; 13 studies, 4663 participants; low-quality evidence). The rate of ipsilateral stroke under both types of anaesthesia was 3.1% (Peto OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.48; P = 0.89; 2 studies, 3733 participants; low-quality evidence). The incidence of stroke or death in the local anaesthesia group was 3.5%, while stroke or death incidence was 4.1% in the general anaesthesia group (Peto OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.16; P = 0.31; 11 studies, 4391 participants; low-quality evidence). A lower rate of death was observed in the local anaesthetic group but evidence was of low quality (Peto OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.06; P = 0.08; 12 studies, 4421 participants). AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe incidence of stroke and death were not convincingly different between local and general anaesthesia for people undergoing carotid endarterectomy. The current evidence supports the choice of either approach. Further high-quality studies are still needed as the evidence is of limited reliability.

Indexed as

Carotid StenosisEndarterectomy, CarotidStrokeAnesthesia, GeneralAnesthesia, LocalHumans

Identifiers

PMID34642940
PMCPMC8511439

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.