An interventional study of Anesthesia drugs during the surgery in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients, sponsored by University of Kansas Medical Center. Recruiting at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-03-12.
Sponsored by University of Kansas Medical Center · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
This study is being done to compare outcomes after surgery for individuals who receive anesthesia through by inhaling medication and individuals who receive anesthesia intravenously by needle when experiencing treatment for their stroke. Currently very little is known about the outcomes for patients when comparing these two techniques of providing anesthesia during surgery. This study will provide information regarding outcomes that will help health care providers decide which technique will be better for patients
According to the National Center for Health Statistics, stroke is a leading cause of disability and in 2021 the number five cause of death in the United States1. Endovascular thrombectomy for patients experiencing acute ischemic stroke from the occlusion of a larger cerebral vessel has become a mainstay of treatment.2 Patients undergoing thrombectomy have significantly reduced disability when compared to patients who do not receive this therapy. Several studies have compared outcomes of patients receiving local anesthesia only or sedation versus general anesthesia during endovascular thrombectomy treatment.3,4 While questions remain, current consensus is that when these procedures are done on patients under general anesthesia, there are higher rates of recanalization (opening of the occluded blood vessel) and improved functional recovery. Currently, less is known about the impact of the general anesthesia technique (inhalation vs. intravenous) on disability and functional outcomes in stroke patients.
Aim: The aim of this study is to compare functional outcomes and disability in patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke under general anesthesia using a volatile inhalational versus total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) technique. Hypothesis: We hypothesize that patients receiving total intravenous anesthesia will have better functional outcomes and less disability compared to those receiving volatile inhalational anesthesia as measured by the 90 day modified Rankin score and compared in both groups.
Background and Significance
University of Kansas Medical Center is the lead sponsor of 483 studies on the registry; 113 are open to participants now.
Of its 38 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 24 (63%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
When treated for acute ischemic stroke, patient will receive inhalation sevoflurane as anesthesia
Procedure: Anesthesia drugs during the surgery
When treated for acute ischemic stroke, patient will receive intravenous propofol infusion as anesthesia
Procedure: Anesthesia drugs during the surgery
During treatment for acute ischemic stroke, patients will be given either inhalation or intravenous anesthesia.
Functional Independence at 90 days
The primary end point is functional independence at 90 days evaluated with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). We plan to compare the functional recovery in 90 days in patients undergoing inhalational versus intravenous general anesthesia during mechanical thrombectomy using the modified Rankin score (mRS) in patients who suffered an acute ischemic stroke. (The mRS assesses a patient's functional independence or dependence after a stroke. Scores range from 0 (no symptoms) to 6 (death), with 0-2 indicating functional independence and 3-5 indicating dependence. A separate category of 6 is often added for patients who have died)
Time frame: From enrollment to 90 days after treatment
Comparison of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score
Comparison of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at presentation and at 90 days between study groups.
Time frame: From enrollment to 90 days after treatment
Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score
Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score comparison between study groups
Time frame: From enrollment to 90 days after treatment
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Kansas Medical Center