Local versus general anesthesia for endovascular aneurysm repair in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives/Background In the endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA), there is no effective evidence to show preference for a specific anesthetic option. A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the result of different anesthesia in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of RAAA. Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies were searched in PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool were applied to evaluate the quality of cohort studies and RCTs, respectively. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to express differences for primary and secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were applied in the primary outcome to illustrate the results further. Significance was set at p < 0.05. Random-effects models were used considering limited research regardless of I-2 < 50%. Results Ten cohort studies were included in this meta-analysis. Perioperative mortality was presented as the primary outcome by analyzing eight of these research. Among the included patients, local anesthesia (LA) was considered as a better choice considering perioperative mortality (n = 156/902) rather than general anesthesia (n = 907/3434) with significant difference (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.35-0.67; p < 0.00001; I-2 = 42%). However, no significant difference was found in the secondary outcome: the complication rate, ICU admission rate, postoperative morbidity of pneumonia, myocardial infarction, leg ischemia, and wound complication. Conclusions There exists some evidence in this review that LA appears to improve perioperative mortality, especially in hemodynamically stable patients and should be recommended for patients undergoing EVAR with RAAA when appropriate.