Objective:
The aim of this study is to compare general anaesthesia (GA) versus regional anaesthesia (RA) for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).
Methods:
We analysed the files of 89 patients between August 2010-August 2012 who underwent elective EVAR retrospectively.
Results:
We performed RA for 32 patients (36%) and GA for 57 patients (64%). The operation was completed successfully in both groups and did not require conventional surgery. The mean age of the patients was 71.5±7 (range 50-88 years). RA was preferred more than GA in the presence of advanced-stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease statistically (p=0.032). The usage of vasodilator drug and atropine was found to be higher in the GA group than the RA group in the intraoperative period (p=0.001 and p=0.01, respectively). The intensive care unit (ICU) was necessary for 5 patients in the RA group (16%) and 13 patients for the GA group (23%) postoperatively (p=0.301). The median ICU stay in the RA group was 2 hours and 4.4 hours in the GA group (p=0.114). The median hospital stay was 2.63±1.91 days in the RA group and 2.04±1.16 days in the GA group, with no statistically significant difference between groups (p=0.120). There was no mortality of patients in either group for the peroperative period and the 30-day follow-up period.
Conclusion:
Our present study suggests that patient characteristics are more important than the anaesthetic method on the outcomes of EVAR.
Keywords: Abdominal aortic aneurysm, endovascular aneurysm repair, anaesthesia