Ished functional neurosurgical approaches for deep-brain stimulation within treatment of Parkinson disease and obsessive-compulsive disorders [6,7]. Recent data suggest that postoperative deficits are less frequent compared to general anaesthesia (GA) [5]. Yet, there is an array of tasks, which have to be accomplished by the anaesthesiologist to avoid complications during ACs. Although anaesthesia for AC is usually well tolerated it requires an extensive knowledge of the principles underlying neuroanaesthesia and the special technical strategies including local anaesthesia for scalp blockade, advanced airway management, dedicated sedation protocols, and skilful management of haemodynamics [7]. One systematic review performed in 2013, focused on the anaesthesia technique for craniotomy [5]. They included only eight studies, published until 2012, which compared GA to AC, but the anaesthetic approach used for AC was not analysed in detail [5]. Nowadays the mainly used anaesthetic techniques for AC include the asleep-awake-asleep (SAS) technique, monitored anaesthesia care (MAC), and the recent introduced awake-awake-awake (AAA) method. SAS is the oldest technique, using GA before and after brain mapping. MAC, also called “conscious sedation” is a mild form of sedation, where the patients`anxiety and pain are controlled, while the patients are able to follow orders and to protect their airways without invasive airway devices [8]. AAA technique only consists of local or regional anaesthesia supplemented with intravenous analgesia but avoiding any sedative anaesthetic. Still, no consensus exists on the optimal anaesthesiological management for AC. In consequence, we decided to analyse the recent evidence of benefits and harms resulting from the different anaesthesia techniques for AC.ObjectivesWe aimed to add to existing knowledge about the process of anaesthesia care for AC, the benefits and harms of the three anaesthesia techniques (MAC, SAS and AAA) for adult patients,PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0156448 May 26,2 /Anaesthesia Management for Awake Craniotomyfrom clinical RP54476MedChemExpress Dalfopristin studies published between January 2007 and December 2015. The primary outcome of interest was the incidence of AC failures, related to the used anaesthesia technique. We reviewed the study-, patient-, anaesthesia- and intraoperative-characteristics, including adverse events and postoperative outcomes.Materials and Methods ProtocolA protocol with the inclusion and exclusion criteria for suitable studies and the method of analysis were established with all authors. The protocol was not published. This systematic review was prepared in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines [9] (see S1 Checklist).RegistrationThis systematic review (SR) was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, CRD42015025376).Eligibility criteriaTypes of studies: Publication types suitable for inclusion were randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective AZD-8055 manufacturer observational clinical trials, and case reports with more than four clinical cases. We excluded animal studies, reviews, paediatric studies, studies on pregnant women, other topics, abstracts, letters, and Non-English publications. Types of participants: The included studies had to report on patients undergoing AC for resection of epileptic foci and tumours that involve eloquent (motor, sensory and language) brain cortices. The studies should.Ished functional neurosurgical approaches for deep-brain stimulation within treatment of Parkinson disease and obsessive-compulsive disorders [6,7]. Recent data suggest that postoperative deficits are less frequent compared to general anaesthesia (GA) [5]. Yet, there is an array of tasks, which have to be accomplished by the anaesthesiologist to avoid complications during ACs. Although anaesthesia for AC is usually well tolerated it requires an extensive knowledge of the principles underlying neuroanaesthesia and the special technical strategies including local anaesthesia for scalp blockade, advanced airway management, dedicated sedation protocols, and skilful management of haemodynamics [7]. One systematic review performed in 2013, focused on the anaesthesia technique for craniotomy [5]. They included only eight studies, published until 2012, which compared GA to AC, but the anaesthetic approach used for AC was not analysed in detail [5]. Nowadays the mainly used anaesthetic techniques for AC include the asleep-awake-asleep (SAS) technique, monitored anaesthesia care (MAC), and the recent introduced awake-awake-awake (AAA) method. SAS is the oldest technique, using GA before and after brain mapping. MAC, also called “conscious sedation” is a mild form of sedation, where the patients`anxiety and pain are controlled, while the patients are able to follow orders and to protect their airways without invasive airway devices [8]. AAA technique only consists of local or regional anaesthesia supplemented with intravenous analgesia but avoiding any sedative anaesthetic. Still, no consensus exists on the optimal anaesthesiological management for AC. In consequence, we decided to analyse the recent evidence of benefits and harms resulting from the different anaesthesia techniques for AC.ObjectivesWe aimed to add to existing knowledge about the process of anaesthesia care for AC, the benefits and harms of the three anaesthesia techniques (MAC, SAS and AAA) for adult patients,PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0156448 May 26,2 /Anaesthesia Management for Awake Craniotomyfrom clinical studies published between January 2007 and December 2015. The primary outcome of interest was the incidence of AC failures, related to the used anaesthesia technique. We reviewed the study-, patient-, anaesthesia- and intraoperative-characteristics, including adverse events and postoperative outcomes.Materials and Methods ProtocolA protocol with the inclusion and exclusion criteria for suitable studies and the method of analysis were established with all authors. The protocol was not published. This systematic review was prepared in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines [9] (see S1 Checklist).RegistrationThis systematic review (SR) was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, CRD42015025376).Eligibility criteriaTypes of studies: Publication types suitable for inclusion were randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective observational clinical trials, and case reports with more than four clinical cases. We excluded animal studies, reviews, paediatric studies, studies on pregnant women, other topics, abstracts, letters, and Non-English publications. Types of participants: The included studies had to report on patients undergoing AC for resection of epileptic foci and tumours that involve eloquent (motor, sensory and language) brain cortices. The studies should.
