The Effect of Mode of Anaesthesia on Outcomes After Elective Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.
Dovell George,Rogers Chris A,Armstrong Richard,Harris Rosie A,Hinchliffe Robert J,Mouton Ronelle
European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery
OBJECTIVE:Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is the most commonly used method to repair abdominal aortic aneurysms. EVAR can be performed using a variety of anaesthetic techniques, including general anaesthetic (GA), regional anaesthetic (RA), and local anaesthetic (LA), but little is known about the effects that each of these anaesthetic modes have on patient outcome. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of anaesthetic technique on early outcomes after elective EVAR. METHODS:Data from the UK's National Vascular Registry were analysed. All patients undergoing elective standard infrarenal EVAR between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016 were included. Patients with a symptomatic aneurysm treated semi-electively were excluded. The primary outcome was in hospital death within 30 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes included post-operative complications and length of hospital stay. Time to event outcomes were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for confounders, including British Aneurysm Repair score (a validated aneurysm risk prediction score that is calculated using age, sex, creatinine, cardiac disease, electrocardiogram, previous aortic surgery, white blood cell count, serum sodium, abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter, and American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade) and chronic lung disease. RESULTS:A total of 9783 patients received an elective, standard infrarenal EVAR (GA, n = 7069; RA, n = 2347; and LA, n = 367) across 89 hospitals. RA and/or LA was used in 82 hospitals. There were 64 in hospital deaths within 30 days, 50 (0.9% mortality at 30 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7-1.2) in the GA group, 11 (0.6%, 95% CI 0.3-1.1) in the RA group, and three (1.5%, 95% CI 0.5-4.7) in the LA group. The mortality rate differed between groups (p = .03) and was significantly lower in the RA group compared with the GA group (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] RA/GA 0.37 [95% CI 0.17-0.81]; LA/GA 0.63 [95% CI 0.15-2.69]). The median length of stay was two days for all modes of anaesthesia, but patients were discharged from hospital more quickly in the RA and LA groups than the GA group (aHR RA/GA 1.10 [95% CI 1.03-1.17]; LA/GA 1.15 [95% CI 1.02-1.29]). Overall, 20.7% of patients experienced one or more complications (GA group, 22.1%; RA group, 16.8%; LA group, 17.7%) and pulmonary complications occurred with similar frequency in the three groups (overall 2.4%, adjusted odds ratio RA/GA 0.93 [95% CI 0.66-1.32]; LA/GA 0.82 [95% CI 0.41-1.63]). CONCLUSION:Thirty day mortality was lower with RA than with GA, but mode of anaesthesia was not associated with increased complications for patients undergoing elective standard infrarenal EVAR.
10.1016/j.ejvs.2020.01.031
Association between mode of anaesthesia and severe maternal morbidity during admission for scheduled Caesarean delivery: a nationwide population-based study in Japan, 2010-2013.
Abe H,Sumitani M,Uchida K,Ikeda T,Matsui H,Fushimi K,Yasunaga H,Yamada Y
British journal of anaesthesia
BACKGROUND:Although the incidence of maternal mortality during Caesarean delivery remains very low, the rate of severe maternal morbidity is increasing. Improvements in obstetric anaesthetic practice have resulted in a dramatic reduction in the risk of maternal death from general anaesthesia. Less clear is whether the risk of severe maternal morbidity differs according to mode of anaesthesia for women undergoing Caesarean delivery. We analysed the association between the mode of anaesthesia and severe maternal morbidity during Caesarean delivery using a nationally representative inpatient database. METHODS:We identified 89 225 women undergoing scheduled Caesarean delivery from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database in Japan, 2010-2013. We defined severe maternal morbidity as the presence of any life-threatening complications and identified women with severe maternal morbidity from the database. Propensity score-matched analysis was carried out to compare the odds of severe maternal morbidity between women who underwent general vs neuraxial anaesthesia. RESULTS:Of 89 225 women, 10 058 received general anaesthesia and 79 167 received neuraxial anaesthesia. In the propensity score-matched analysis with 10 046 pairs, a higher incidence of severe maternal morbidity was observed among patients receiving general (2.00%) rather than neuraxial anaesthesia (0.76%). The odds ratio of severe maternal morbidity was 2.68 (95% CI, 1.97-3.64) among women receiving general compared with neuraxial anaesthesia. CONCLUSIONS:For scheduled Caesarean delivery, general anaesthesia compared with neuraxial anaesthesia is associated with greater odds for severe maternal morbidity. However, we should be cautious with interpretation of these findings because they may be explained by confounding indications.
10.1016/j.bja.2017.11.101
Is Anesthesia Technique Associated With a Higher Risk of Mortality or Complications Within 90 Days of Surgery for Geriatric Patients With Hip Fractures?
Desai Vimal,Chan Priscilla H,Prentice Heather A,Zohman Gary L,Diekmann Glenn R,Maletis Gregory B,Fasig Brian H,Diaz Diana,Chung Elena,Qiu Chunyuan
Clinical orthopaedics and related research
BACKGROUND:Postoperative mortality and complications after geriatric hip fracture surgery remain high despite efforts to improve perioperative care for these patients. One factor of particular interest is anesthetic technique, but prior studies on this are limited by sample selection, competing risks, and incomplete followup. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES:(1) Among older patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture, does 90-day mortality differ depending on the type of anesthesia received? (2) Do 90-day emergency department returns and hospital readmissions differ based on anesthetic technique after geriatric hip fracture repairs? (3) Do 90-day Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) outcomes differ according to anesthetic techniques used during hip fracture surgery? METHODS:We conducted a retrospective study on geriatric patients (65 years or older) with hip fractures between 2009 and 2014 using the Kaiser Permanente Hip Fracture Registry. A total of 1995 (11%) of the surgically treated patients with hip fracture were excluded as a result of missing anesthesia information. The final study sample consisted of 16,695 patients. Of these, 2027 (12%) died and 98 (< 1%) terminated membership during followup, which were handled as competing events and censoring events, respectively. Ninety-day mortality, emergency department returns, hospital readmission, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), myocardial infarction (MI), and pneumonia were evaluated using multivariable competing risk proportional subdistribution hazard regression according to type of anesthesia technique: general anesthesia, regional anesthesia, or conversion from regional to general. Of the 16,695 patients, 58% (N = 9629) received general anesthesia, 40% (N = 6597) received regional anesthesia, and 2.8% (N = 469) patients were converted from regional to general. RESULTS:Compared with regional anesthesia, patients treated with general anesthesia had a higher likelihood of overall 90-day mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.35; p < 0.001); however, when stratified by before and after hospital discharge but within 90 days of surgery, this higher risk was only observed during the inpatient stay (HR, 3.83; 95% CI, 3.18-4.61; p < 0.001); no difference was observed after hospital discharge (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.94-1.16; p = 0.408). Patients undergoing conversion from regional to general also had a higher overall mortality risk compared with those undergoing regional anesthesia (HR, 1.34; 95% CI 1.04-1.74; p = 0.026), but this risk was only observed during their inpatient stay (HR, 6.84; 95% CI, 4.21-11.11; p < 0.001) when stratifying by before and after hospital discharge. Patients undergoing general anesthesia had a higher risk for all-cause readmission when compared with regional anesthesia (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01-1.19; p = 0.026). No differences according to anesthesia type were observed for risk of 90-day AHRQ outcomes, including DVT/PE, MI, and pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS:We found the use of general anesthesia and conversion from regional to general anesthesia were associated with a higher risk of mortality during the in-hospital stay compared with regional anesthetic techniques, but this higher risk did not persist after hospital discharge. We also found general anesthesia to be associated with a higher risk of all-cause readmission compared with regional, but no other differences were observed in risk for complications. Our findings suggest regional anesthetic techniques may be preferred when possible in this patient population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level III, therapeutic study.
10.1007/s11999.0000000000000147
Impact of multiple nerves blocks anaesthesia on intraoperative hypotension and mortality in hip fracture surgery intermediate-risk elderly patients: A propensity score-matched comparison with spinal and general anaesthesia.
Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine
BACKGROUND:A Hip fracture in the intermediate-risk elderly patient is common and associated with a high rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality. There is a lack of consensus on the optimal anaesthetic technique but there is a clear association between intraoperative hypotension and postoperative morbidity and mortality. We aimed to compare the haemodynamic stability of three anaesthesia techniques: general anaesthesia (GA), continuous spinal anaesthesia (CSA), and multiple nerve blocks (MNB). METHODS:The primary outcome was the occurrence of intraoperative hypotension defined by a 30% decrease in mean arterial pressure (MAP) from baseline. Secondary outcomes included incidence of hypotension under 50 mmHg of MAP, time spent below MAP 50 mmHg, use of vasopressors, in-hospital and 30-day mortality. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed. RESULTS:After screening and application of the exclusion criteria, 593 patients undergoing hip fracture surgery between the 1 of January 2015 and the 31 of December 2016 were included. The propensity score match analysis selected 43 patients in each group. The incidence of hypotension was significantly higher in the GA group than in the MNB and CSA groups: 39 (90%), 22 (51%), and 23 (53.5%), respectively; p < 0.0001. The incidence of MAP < 50 mmHg (59.5%, 23.3%, and 16.3%; p < 0.0001) and the use of vasopressors (93%, 39.5%, and 25.6%; p < 0.0001) were increased significantly in the GA group. With the GA group as a reference, odds ratios were reported in the MNB group at 0.08 [0.022-0.30] (p = 0.0002) for hypotension episodes; 0.17 [0.04-0.66] (p = 0.01) for hypotension < 50 mmHg for more than 3 min and 0.049 [0.013-0.018] (p < 0.0001) for use of vasopressors. The duration of hospital stay, postoperative complications, in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSION:CSA and MNB provide better haemodynamic stability than GA. However, whatever the anaesthesia technique used, the mortality rates do not change even if MNB leads to less hypotension. IRB contact information: CERAR IRB 00010254-2016-118. Clinical Trial Number: ClinicalTrials.gov. ID: NCT03356704.
10.1016/j.accpm.2021.100924
General vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Van Waesberghe Julia,Stevanovic Ana,Rossaint Rolf,Coburn Mark
BMC anesthesiology
BACKGROUND:Hip fracture is a trauma of the elderly. The worldwide number of patients in need of surgery after hip fracture will increase in the coming years. The 30-day mortality ranges between 4 and 14%. Patients' outcome may be improved by anaesthesia technique (general vs. neuraxial anaesthesia). There is a dearth of evidence from randomised studies regarding to the optimal anaesthesia technique. However, several large non-randomised studies addressing this question have been published from the onset of 2010. METHODS:To compare the 30-day mortality rate, in-hospital mortality rate and length of hospital stay after neuraxial (epidural/spinal) or general anaesthesia in hip fracture patients (≥ 18 years old) we prepared a systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic search for appropriate retrospective observational and prospective randomised studies in Embase and PubMed databases was performed in the time-period from 01.01.2010 to 21.11.2016. Additionally a forward searching in google scholar, a level one reference list searching and a formal searching of trial registries was performed. RESULTS:Twenty retrospective observational and three prospective randomised controlled studies were included. There was no difference in the 30-day mortality [OR 0.99; 95% CI (0.94 to 1.04), p = 0.60] between the general and the neuraxial anaesthesia group. The in-hospital mortality [OR 0.85; 95% CI (0.76 to 0.95), p = 0.004] and the length of hospital stay were significantly shorter in the neuraxial anaesthesia group [MD -0.26; 95% CI (-0.36 to -0.17); p < 0.00001]. CONCLUSION:Neuraxial anaesthesia is associated with a reduced in-hospital mortality and length of hospitalisation. However, type of anaesthesia did not influence the 30-day mortality. In future there is a need for large randomised studies to examine the association between the type of anaesthesia, post-operative complications and mortality.
10.1186/s12871-017-0380-9
Effect of anesthesia methods on postoperative major adverse cardiac events and mortality after non-cardiac surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
An Ran,Pang Qian-Yun,Chen Bo,Liu Hong-Liang
Minerva anestesiologica
INTRODUCTION:Postoperative major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) are the main cause of postoperative mortality, and controversies exist regarding the effects of anesthesia methods on postoperative MACEs and mortality in high-risk cardiac patients after non-cardiac surgeries. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION:A Meta-analysis about the effect of anesthesia methods on postoperative MACEs and mortality in high-risk cardiac patients undergoing intermediate- or high-risk non-cardiac surgeries was conducted; Chinese databases (SinoMed, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP) and English databases (Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, Springer, Ovid, the Cochrane Library, and Google scholar) were searched. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS:Twenty-seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included and 35340 patients were involved. The cardiac troponin I level (cTnI) on postoperative day 1 (MD: -0.39, 95% CI: -0.45--0.34, P<0.00001) and the incidence of myocardial ischaemia (OR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.27-0.68, P=0.0004) within 3 postoperative days were significantly lower after sevoflurane anesthesia than propofol anesthesia. There were no differences in postoperative MACEs or in mortality within either 30 days or 1 year between sevoflurane and propofol anesthesia, or between N2O and non-N2O anesthesia. The cTnI on postoperative day 3 was significantly lower from epidural anesthesia combined with general anesthesia (GA) than from GA alone (MD: -0.61, 95% CI: -0.75--0.47, P<0.00001). However, there were no differences in myocardial infarction or mortality between epidural anesthesia combined with GA and GA alone, or between spinal anesthesia alone and GA alone. CONCLUSIONS:Sevoflurane anesthesia, or epidural combined with general anesthesia can provide short-term myocardial protective effect in high-risk cardiac patients undergoing intermediate- or high-risk non-cardiac surgeries.
10.23736/S0375-9393.17.11869-9
Anesthesia Technique and Mortality after Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective, Propensity Score-matched Cohort Study.
Perlas Anahi,Chan Vincent W S,Beattie Scott
Anesthesiology
BACKGROUND:This propensity score-matched cohort study evaluates the effect of anesthetic technique on a 30-day mortality after total hip or knee arthroplasty. METHODS:All patients who had hip or knee arthroplasty between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2014, were evaluated. The principal exposure was spinal versus general anesthesia. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were (1) perioperative myocardial infarction; (2) a composite of major adverse cardiac events that includes cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, or newly diagnosed arrhythmia; (3) pulmonary embolism; (4) major blood loss; (5) hospital length of stay; and (6) operating room procedure time. A propensity score-matched-pair analysis was performed using a nonparsimonious logistic regression model of regional anesthetic use. RESULTS:We identified 10,868 patients, of whom 8,553 had spinal anesthesia and 2,315 had general anesthesia. Ninety-two percent (n = 2,135) of the patients who had general anesthesia were matched to similar patients who did not have general anesthesia. In the matched cohort, the 30-day mortality rate was 0.19% (n = 4) in the spinal anesthesia group and 0.8% (n = 17) in the general anesthesia group (risk ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.83; P = 0.0045). Spinal anesthesia was also associated with a shorter hospital length of stay (5.7 vs. 6.6 days; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:The results of this observational, propensity score-matched cohort study suggest a strong association between spinal anesthesia and lower 30-day mortality, as well as a shorter hospital length of stay, after elective joint replacement surgery.
10.1097/ALN.0000000000001248
Effect of anaesthesia type on postoperative mortality and morbidities: a matched analysis of the NSQIP database.
Saied N N,Helwani M A,Weavind L M,Shi Y,Shotwell M S,Pandharipande P P
British journal of anaesthesia
BACKGROUND:The anaesthetic technique may influence clinical outcomes, but inherent confounding and small effect sizes makes this challenging to study. We hypothesized that regional anaesthesia (RA) is associated with higher survival and fewer postoperative organ dysfunctions when compared with general anaesthesia (GA). METHODS:We matched surgical procedures and type of anaesthesia using the US National Surgical Quality Improvement database, in which 264,421 received GA and 64,119 received RA. Procedures were matched according to Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and ASA physical status classification. Our primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality and secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay, and postoperative organ system dysfunction. After matching, multiple regression analysis was used to examine associations between anaesthetic type and outcomes, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS:After matching and adjusting for covariates, type of anaesthesia did not significantly impact 30-day mortality. RA was significantly associated with increased likelihood of early discharge (HR 1.09; P< 0.001), 47% lower odds of intraoperative complications, and 24% lower odds of respiratory complications. RA was also associated with 16% lower odds of developing deep vein thrombosis and 15% lower odds of developing any one postoperative complication (OR 0.85; P < 0.001). There was no evidence of an effect of anaesthesia technique on postoperative MI, stroke, renal complications, pulmonary embolism or peripheral nerve injury. CONCLUSIONS:After adjusting for clinical and patient characteristic confounders, RA was associated with significantly lower odds of several postoperative complications, decreased hospital length of stay, but not mortality when compared with GA.
10.1093/bja/aew383
Decreased mortality with local versus general anesthesia in endovascular aneurysm repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in the Vascular Quality Initiative database.
Faizer Rumi,Weinhandl Eric,El Hag Selma,Le Jeune Stacey,Apostolidou Ioanna,Shafii Susan M,Lee Cheong J,Rosenberg Michael S,Reed Amy,Fanola Christina L
Journal of vascular surgery
BACKGROUND:Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is an accepted approach for patients presenting with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) and suitable anatomy. The effect of anesthesia modality on mortality outcomes in rAAA has not been well described. Using the Vascular Quality Initiative database, this study compares local anesthesia (LA) vs general anesthesia (GA) in EVAR for rAAA. METHODS:The Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for patients presenting with rAAA managed with open surgical repair, EVAR under LA (rEVAR-LA), and EVAR under GA (rEVAR-GA) between 2003 and 2017. Patients were observed until the earlier end point of either death or 1-year follow-up. Kaplan-Meier event rates are presented at 30 days and 1 year. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model risk of death, with adjustment for demographic and clinical factors. Additional multivariate Cox hazards analyses were used to assess effect modifiers for 1-year mortality for the different repair methods. RESULTS:A total of 3330 patients (77.4% male) met the inclusion criteria (1594 [47.9%] open surgical repair, 226 [6.8%] rEVAR-LA, and 1510 [45.3%] rEVAR-GA). Patients treated with rEVAR-LA compared with rEVAR-GA had decreased intraoperative time, number of intraoperative blood transfusions, intraoperative crystalloid administration, intensive care unit length of stay, and postoperative pulmonary complications. Mortality rates with rEVAR-LA were lower compared with rEVAR-GA at 30 days (15.5% vs 23.3%; adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.99; P = .04) and at 1 year (22.5% vs 32.3%; AHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.96; P = .02). Patients undergoing EVAR who were <75 years old and those without preoperative hypotension had the greatest survival benefit from LA compared with GA (both factors: AHR, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.03-0.57]; single factor: AHR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.36-0.91]). CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that rEVAR-LA for rAAA may be a safe alternative to rEVAR-GA for certain patients, with lower morbidity and improved mortality. Further prospective study is warranted to confirm mortality benefit in rEVAR-LA for rAAA.
10.1016/j.jvs.2018.10.090
Comparison of general anaesthesia and regional anaesthesia in terms of mortality and complications in elderly patients with hip fracture: a nationwide population-based study.
Ahn Eun Jin,Kim Hyo Jin,Kim Kyung Woo,Choi Hey Ran,Kang Hyun,Bang Si Ra
BMJ open
OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effects of anaesthesia on postoperative outcome in elderly patients who underwent hip fracture surgery. SETTING:Nationwide National Health Insurance Sharing Service database of Korea. PARTICIPANTS:All patients aged ≥65 years old who underwent hip fracture surgery, covered by the Korean National Health Insurance, between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2015. INTERVENTIONS:Hip fracture surgery under general anaesthesia (group GA) or regional anaesthesia (group RA), with a principal diagnosis of femoral fracture. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was the anaesthetic-type effect on 30-day mortality and the secondary outcome was postoperative delirium requiring pharmacological intervention. RESULTS:Among the 96 289 patients who underwent hip fracture surgery, 25 593 and 70 696 patients received GA and RA, respectively. After propensity score matching, 25 593 remained in each group. Postmatching mortality was lower in the RA than in the GA group (574 (2.24%) vs 654 (2.55%), p=0·0047, 95% CI -0.0099 to 0.0159). Delirium incidence was lower in the RA than in the GA group (5187 (20.27%) vs 5828 (22.77%), p<0·0001, 95% CI 0.019 to 0.045). The incidence of intensive care unit stay and ventilator care was lower in the RA than in the GA group (5838 (22.1%) vs 8055 (31.47%), p<0·0001, 95% CI 0.046 to 0.070 and 459 (1.73%) vs 1207 (4.72%), p<0·0001, 95% CI -0.0024 to 0.023, respectively). CONCLUSION:RA was associated with better outcomes than GA, in terms of mortality, delirium, intensive care unit admission and ventilator care, in elderly patients who underwent hip fracture surgery.
10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029245
Association between neuraxial anaesthesia or general anaesthesia for lower limb revascularisation surgery in adults and clinical outcomes: population based comparative effectiveness study.
Roberts Derek J,Nagpal Sudhir K,Kubelik Dalibor,Brandys Timothy,Stelfox Henry T,Lalu Manoj M,Forster Alan J,McCartney Colin Jl,McIsaac Daniel I
BMJ (Clinical research ed.)
OBJECTIVE:To examine the associations between neuraxial anaesthesia or general anaesthesia and clinical outcomes, length of hospital stay, and readmission in adults undergoing lower limb revascularisation surgery. DESIGN:Comparative effectiveness study using linked, validated, population based databases. SETTING:Ontario, Canada, 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2015. PARTICIPANTS:20 988 patients Ontario residents aged 18 years or older who underwent their first lower limb revascularisation surgery in hospitals performing 50 or more of these surgeries annually. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcome was 30 day all cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital cardiopulmonary and renal complications, length of hospital stay, and 30 day readmissions. Multivariable, mixed effects regression models, adjusting for patient, procedural, and hospital characteristics, were used to estimate associations between anaesthetic technique and outcomes. Robustness of analyses were evaluated by conducting instrumental variable, propensity score matched, and survival sensitivity analyses. RESULTS:Of 20 988 patients who underwent lower limb revascularisation surgery, 6453 (30.7%) received neuraxial anaesthesia and 14 535 (69.3%) received general anaesthesia. The percentage of neuraxial anaesthesia use ranged from 0.6% to 90.6% across included hospitals. Furthermore, use of neuraxial anaesthesia declined by 17% over the study period. Death within 30 days occurred in 204 (3.2%) patients who received neuraxial anaesthesia and 646 (4.4%) patients who received general anaesthesia. After multivariable, multilevel adjustment, use of neuraxial anaesthesia compared with use of general anaesthesia was associated with decreased 30 day mortality (absolute risk reduction 0.72%, 95% confidence interval 0.65% to 0.79%; odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.83; number needed to treat to prevent one death=139). A similar direction and magnitude of association was found in instrumental variable, propensity score matched, and survival analyses. Use of neuraxial anaesthesia compared with use of general anaesthesia was also associated with decreased in-hospital cardiopulmonary and renal complications (odds ratio 0.73, 0.63 to 0.85) and a reduced length of hospital stay (-0.5 days, -0.3 to-0.6 days). CONCLUSIONS:Use of neuraxial anaesthesia compared with general anaesthesia for lower limb revascularisation surgery was associated with decreased 30 day mortality and hospital length of stay. These findings might have been related to reduced cardiopulmonary and renal complications after neuraxial anaesthesia and support the increased use of neuraxial anaesthesia in patients undergoing these surgeries until the results of a large, confirmatory randomised trial become available.
10.1136/bmj.m4104
Regional Anaesthesia for Lower Extremity Amputation is Associated with Reduced Post-operative Complications Compared with General Anaesthesia.
Mufarrih Syed Hamza,Qureshi Nada Qaisar,Schaefer Maximilian S,Sharkey Aidan,Fatima Huma,Chaudhary Omar,Krumm Santiago,Baribeau Vincent,Mahmood Feroze,Schermerhorn Marc,Matyal Robina
European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery
OBJECTIVE:Primary and secondary lower extremity amputation, performed for patients with lower extremity arterial disease, is associated with increased post-operative morbidity. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of regional anaesthesia vs. general anaesthesia on post-operative pulmonary complications. METHODS:A retrospective analysis of 45 492 patients undergoing lower extremity amputation between 2005 and 2018 was conducted using data from the American College of Surgeons National Safety Quality Improvement Program database. Multivariable logistic regression was carried out to assess differences in primary outcome of post-operative pulmonary complications (pneumonia or respiratory failure requiring re-intubation) within 48 hours and 30 days after surgery between patients receiving regional (RA) or general anaesthesia (GA). Secondary outcomes included post-operative blood transfusion, septic shock, re-operation, and post-operative death within 30 days. RESULTS:Of 45 492 patients, 40 026 (88.0%) received GA and 5 466 (12.0%) RA. Patients who received GA had higher odds of developing pulmonary complications at 48 hours (2.1% vs. 1.4%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09 - 1.78; p = .007) and within 30 days (6.3% vs. 5.9%; aOR 1.15, 95% CI 1.09 - 1.78; p = .039). The odds of blood transfusions (aOR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02 - 1.21; p = .017), septic shock (aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03 - 1.60; p = .025) and re-operation (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.03 - 1.53; p = .023) were also higher for patients who received GA vs. patients who received RA. No difference in mortality rate was observed between patients who received GA and those who received RA (5.7% vs. 7.1%; odds ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.84 - 1.07). CONCLUSION:A statistically significant reduction in pulmonary complications was observed in patients who received RA for lower extremity amputation compared with GA.
10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.05.040
Spinal or general anaesthesia for surgical repair of hip fracture and subsequent risk of mortality and morbidity: a database analysis using propensity score-matching.
Morgan L,McKeever T M,Nightingale J,Deakin D E,Moppett I K
Anaesthesia
Around 76,000 people fracture their hip annually in the UK at a considerable personal, social and financial cost. Despite longstanding debate, the optimal mode of anaesthesia (general or spinal) remains unclear. Our aim was to assess whether there is a significant difference in mortality and morbidity between patients undergoing spinal anaesthesia compared with general anaesthesia during hip fracture surgery. A secondary analysis examined whether a difference exists in mortality for patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This was a clinical database analysis of patients treated for hip fracture in Nottingham, UK between 2004 and 2015. Propensity score-matching was used to generate matched pairs of patients, one of whom underwent each mode of anaesthesia. Data were analysed using conditional logistic regression, with 7164 patients successfully matched. There was no difference in 30- or 90-day mortality in patients who had spinal rather than general anaesthesia (OR [95%CI] 0.97 [0.8-1.15]; p = 0.764 and 0.93 [0.82-1.05]; p = 0.247 respectively). Patients who had a spinal anaesthetic had a lower-risk of blood transfusion (OR [95%CI] 0.84 [0.75-0.94]; p = 0.003) and urinary tract infection (OR [95%CI] 0.72 [0.61-0.84]; p < 0.001), but were more likely to develop a chest infection (OR [95%CI] 1.23 [1.07-1.42]; p = 0.004), deep vein thrombosis (OR [95%CI] 2.18 [1.07-4.45]; p = 0.032) or pulmonary embolism (OR [95%CI] 2.23 [1.16-4.29]; p = 0.016). The mode of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery resulted in no significant difference in mortality, but there was a significant difference in several measures of postoperative morbidity.
10.1111/anae.15042
General versus spinal anaesthesia in proximal femoral fracture surgery - treatment outcomes.
Lončarić-Katušin Mirjana,Mišković Petar,Lavrnja-Skolan Vlasta,Katušin Juraj,Bakota Bore,Žunić Josip
Injury
BACKGROUND:Proximal femoral fractures are a major public health problem because of the increasing proportion of elderly individuals in the general population. The mode of choice for anaesthesia in surgical treatment of these fractures is still debated in terms of better postoperative outcome. The aim of our study was to compare the effect of general over spinal anaesthesia on mortality in proximal femoral fracture surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS:This study was a retrospective analysis of 115 patients aged at least 70 years who underwent surgery for proximal femoral fracture. The survey was conducted from 1 January to 31 December 2015 at the General Hospital Karlovac, Croatia. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 - general anaesthesia and group 2 - spinal anaesthesia. The primary outcome measure was the effect of mode of anaesthesia, general versus spinal, on mortality within 30 days, six months and one year after surgery. RESULTS:General anaesthesia (EndoTracheal Anaesthesia) was administered in 77 patients (67%; group I - ETA) and spinal anaesthesia in 38 patients (33%; group 2 - SPIN). Both groups had more female than male patients: 69 patients (89.6%) in the ETA group and 32 patients (84.2%) in the SPIN group were female. The mean age in the ETA group was 82.91 years and in the SPIN group was 80.18 years. ASA II status was more common in patients in the SPIN group (25 patients [65.8%]). The average time from hospitalisation to surgery was 53.44 hours in the ETA group and 53.33 hours in the SPIN group. There was no significant difference between groups in the number of comorbidities, or intraoperative and postoperative complications. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the groups. Mortality after surgery in the ETA and SPIN groups, respectively, was as follows: 10.4% and 10.5% at 30 days, 23.4% and 15.8% at six months, and 32.5% and 31.6% at one year. CONCLUSION:The results indicate that the mode of anaesthesia (general vs spinal) has no effect on postoperative mortality, and that the mode of anaesthesia should be applied on an individual basis in correlation with associated comorbidities.
10.1016/S0020-1383(17)30740-4
Comparison of Peripheral Nerve Block and Spinal Anesthesia in Terms of Postoperative Mortality and Walking Ability in Elderly Hip Fracture Patients - A Retrospective, Propensity-Score Matched Study.
Clinical interventions in aging
PURPOSE:To compare the effects of peripheral nerve block (PNB) and spinal anesthesia (SA) on one-year mortality and walking ability of elderly hip fracture patients after hip arthroplasty. METHODS:Patients ≥65 years who underwent unilateral hip arthroplasty due to femoral neck fracture, using either PNB or SA from 2014 to 2019, were included. Demographic data, comorbidities, and results of preoperative screening were retrospectively collected. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed in a ratio of 1:1 for PNB and SA groups. The primary outcomes were 30-day, 90-day, and one-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included walking ability in the first postoperative year, major complications, length of stay, and the cost of hospitalization. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS:Three hundred and sixteen patients were included, of whom 200 received SA and 116 received PNB. Eighty-nine patients in each group were matched after PSM. Patients in the PNB group showed significantly lower risks of death in 30 days (2.2% vs 10.1%, P=0.029) and 90 days (3.4% vs 12.4%, P=0.026) after hip arthroplasty, when compared to the SA group. There was no significant difference in one-year mortality, walking ability, major complications, and length of stay. Higher hospitalization cost was found in the PNB group (53,828.21 CNY vs 59,278.83 CNY, P=0.024). One-year accumulated survival rate was higher in the PNB group without reaching a significant level. CONCLUSION:PNB was related to lower 30- and 90-day mortality but higher hospitalization cost in elderly hip fracture patients after hip arthroplasty. However, the anesthesia types were not associated with one-year mortality, one-year walking ability, major complications, and length of stay.
10.2147/CIA.S311188
Outcome by mode of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery. An observational audit of 65 535 patients in a national dataset.
White S M,Moppett I K,Griffiths R
Anaesthesia
Large observational studies of accurate data can provide similar results to more arduous and expensive randomised controlled trials. In 2012, the National Hip Fracture Database extended its dataset to include 'type of anaesthesia' data fields. We analysed 65 535 patient record sets to determine differences in outcome. Type of anaesthesia was recorded in 59 191 (90%) patients. Omitting patients who received both general and spinal anaesthesia or in whom an uncertain type of anaesthesia was recorded, there was no significant difference in either cumulative five-day (2.8% vs 2.8%, p = 0.991) or 30-day (7.0% vs 7.5%, p = 0.053) mortality between 30 130 patients receiving general anaesthesia and 22 999 patients receiving spinal anaesthesia, even when 30-day mortality was adjusted for age and ASA physical status (p = 0.226). Mortality within 24 hours after surgery was significantly higher among patients receiving cemented compared with uncemented hemiarthroplasty (1.6% vs 1.2%, p = 0.030), suggesting excess early mortality related to bone cement implantation syndrome. If these data are accurate, then either there is no difference in 30-day mortality between general and spinal anaesthesia after hip fracture surgery per se, and therefore future research should focus on how to make both types of anaesthesia safer, or there is a difference, but mortality is not the correct outcome to measure after anaesthesia, and therefore future research should focus on differences between general and spinal anaesthesia. These could include more anaesthesia-sensitive outcomes, such as hypotension, pain, postoperative confusion, respiratory infection and mobilisation.
10.1111/anae.12542