ArticleAcute and critical care2025
Anesthesiological management in endovascular mechanical thrombectomy: a propensity score-matched retrospective analysis in Italy.
Article in Acute and critical care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndovascular mechanical thrombectomy (EMT) can be performed with general anesthesia (GA) or using non-GA techniques. Several meta-analyses on the topic have reported discordant main outcomes. The aim of this retrospective single-center study was to analyze the relationship between clinical outcomes and anesthesiological management (GA vs. non-GA) in patients who underwent EMT for acute anterior ischemic stroke (AIS).
methodsWe performed a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis of patients who underwent EMT for acute AIS from January 2018 to December 2021. For PSM, we chose covariates influencing clinical decisions about anesthesiological management. Comparisons between groups were performed with the chi-square test for categorical variables and Student t-test or the Mann-Whitney U-test for continuous variables as appropriate. The relationships between anesthesiological management and clinical outcomes were analyzed using logistic regression, and results are reported as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. A two-sided P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsFrom 194 observations (78 in the GA group, 116 in the non-GA group), after PSM, we obtained 70 data pairs. Both anesthesiological approaches resulted in similar rates of in-hospital mortality, 90-day functional independence, full recanalization, procedural complications, and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Performing EMT with GA was unrelated to the in-hospital and 90-day death rates, 90-day functional independence, full recanalization rate, procedural complications, and ICH (P>0.05).
conclusionsAnesthesiological management did not influence clinical outcomes of EMT for acute AIS. Physiological stability during EMT may impact outcomes more significantly than anesthesiological management. Further studies on this topic are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.