Özet:

Objective: In this study we aimed to compare the anesthesia methods we used in the endovascular treatment of thoracic and abdominal aorta pathologies and to discuss accompanied by literature. Methods: Our study was carried out be retrospectively assessing a total of 20 patients on whom we had administered endovascular treatment for aortic aneurism and aortic dissection. The demographic features of the patients, their American Anesthesia Association (ASA) scores, laboratory findings, accompanying diseases, whether they smoke, their ejection fraction and the place and type of aortic pathology was recorded. Also the surgical procedure, anesthesia method, the amounts of crystalloids, colloids and blood products used during the surgery, the anesthesia and surgery durations, complications and interventions, duration of stays in intensive care and the hospital in general and the mortality rates were recorded. All cases were provided with standard anesthesia monitoring. Results: A total of 20 (M=15, F=5) cases were included in our study. 16 of our cases were in ASA 3 risk group and 4 were in ASA 4 risk group. While patients who had been administered with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) were all given general anesthesia, seven patients who had been administered with abdominal endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) were given regional and 6 were given general anesthesia and one case was only given sedoanalgesia. While 8 of the patients administered with EVAR had hypertension all of the patients administered with TEVAR had hypertension. No significant differences were found in blood and blood product transfusions, preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin, hematocrit, urea and creatinine values between two groups. Conclusion: In EVAR and TEVAR applications general anesthesia, regional anesthesia, sedoanalgesia accompanied by local anesthesia can be successfully administered depending on the patient\'s status and the location of the procedure.

Anahtar Kelimeler: