Cargando…

General vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Van Waesberghe, Julia, Stevanovic, Ana, Rossaint, Rolf, Coburn, Mark
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5490182/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28659127
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-017-0380-9
_version_ 1783246935566581760
author Van Waesberghe, Julia
Stevanovic, Ana
Rossaint, Rolf
Coburn, Mark
author_facet Van Waesberghe, Julia
Stevanovic, Ana
Rossaint, Rolf
Coburn, Mark
author_sort Van Waesberghe, Julia
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5490182
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54901822017-06-30 General vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis Van Waesberghe, Julia Stevanovic, Ana Rossaint, Rolf Coburn, Mark BMC Anesthesiol Research Article 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. BioMed Central 2017-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5490182/ /pubmed/28659127 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-017-0380-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Van Waesberghe, Julia
Stevanovic, Ana
Rossaint, Rolf
Coburn, Mark
General vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title General vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full General vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr General vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed General vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short General vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort general vs. neuraxial anaesthesia in hip fracture patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5490182/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28659127
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-017-0380-9
work_keys_str_mv AT vanwaesberghejulia generalvsneuraxialanaesthesiainhipfracturepatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT stevanovicana generalvsneuraxialanaesthesiainhipfracturepatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT rossaintrolf generalvsneuraxialanaesthesiainhipfracturepatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT coburnmark generalvsneuraxialanaesthesiainhipfracturepatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis