Cargando…
Efficiency of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of 544 patients
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown varying results in selected outcomes when directly comparing spinal anesthesia to general in lumbar surgery. Some studies have shown reduced surgical time, postoperative pain, time in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), incidence of urinary retention, postope...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5644537/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29066932 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/LRA.S141233 |
_version_ | 1783271742639177728 |
---|---|
author | Pierce, John T Kositratna, Guy Attiah, Mark A Kallan, Michael J Koenigsberg, Rebecca Syre, Peter Wyler, David Marcotte, Paul J Kofke, W Andrew Welch, William C |
author_facet | Pierce, John T Kositratna, Guy Attiah, Mark A Kallan, Michael J Koenigsberg, Rebecca Syre, Peter Wyler, David Marcotte, Paul J Kofke, W Andrew Welch, William C |
author_sort | Pierce, John T |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown varying results in selected outcomes when directly comparing spinal anesthesia to general in lumbar surgery. Some studies have shown reduced surgical time, postoperative pain, time in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), incidence of urinary retention, postoperative nausea, and more favorable cost-effectiveness with spinal anesthesia. Despite these results, the current literature has also shown contradictory results in between-group comparisons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed by querying the electronic medical record database for surgeries performed by a single surgeon between 2007 and 2011 using procedural codes 63030 for diskectomy and 63047 for laminectomy: 544 lumbar laminectomy and diskectomy surgeries were identified, with 183 undergoing general anesthesia and 361 undergoing spinal anesthesia (SA). Linear and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify differences in blood loss, operative time, time from entering the operating room (OR) until incision, time from bandage placement to exiting the OR, total anesthesia time, PACU time, and total hospital stay. Secondary outcomes of interest included incidence of postoperative spinal hematoma and death, incidence of paraparesis, plegia, post-dural puncture headache, and paresthesia, among the SA patients. RESULTS: SA was associated with significantly lower operative time, blood loss, total anesthesia time, time from entering the OR until incision, time from bandage placement until exiting the OR, and total duration of hospital stay, but a longer stay in the PACU. The SA group experienced one spinal hematoma, which was evacuated without any long-term neurological deficits, and neither group experienced a death. The SA group had no episodes of paraparesis or plegia, post-dural puncture headaches, or episodes of persistent postoperative paresthesia or weakness. CONCLUSION: SA is effective for use in patients undergoing elective lumbar laminectomy and/or diskectomy spinal surgery, and was shown to be the more expedient anesthetic choice in the perioperative setting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5644537 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Dove Medical Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56445372017-10-24 Efficiency of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of 544 patients Pierce, John T Kositratna, Guy Attiah, Mark A Kallan, Michael J Koenigsberg, Rebecca Syre, Peter Wyler, David Marcotte, Paul J Kofke, W Andrew Welch, William C Local Reg Anesth Original Research BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown varying results in selected outcomes when directly comparing spinal anesthesia to general in lumbar surgery. Some studies have shown reduced surgical time, postoperative pain, time in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), incidence of urinary retention, postoperative nausea, and more favorable cost-effectiveness with spinal anesthesia. Despite these results, the current literature has also shown contradictory results in between-group comparisons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed by querying the electronic medical record database for surgeries performed by a single surgeon between 2007 and 2011 using procedural codes 63030 for diskectomy and 63047 for laminectomy: 544 lumbar laminectomy and diskectomy surgeries were identified, with 183 undergoing general anesthesia and 361 undergoing spinal anesthesia (SA). Linear and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify differences in blood loss, operative time, time from entering the operating room (OR) until incision, time from bandage placement to exiting the OR, total anesthesia time, PACU time, and total hospital stay. Secondary outcomes of interest included incidence of postoperative spinal hematoma and death, incidence of paraparesis, plegia, post-dural puncture headache, and paresthesia, among the SA patients. RESULTS: SA was associated with significantly lower operative time, blood loss, total anesthesia time, time from entering the OR until incision, time from bandage placement until exiting the OR, and total duration of hospital stay, but a longer stay in the PACU. The SA group experienced one spinal hematoma, which was evacuated without any long-term neurological deficits, and neither group experienced a death. The SA group had no episodes of paraparesis or plegia, post-dural puncture headaches, or episodes of persistent postoperative paresthesia or weakness. CONCLUSION: SA is effective for use in patients undergoing elective lumbar laminectomy and/or diskectomy spinal surgery, and was shown to be the more expedient anesthetic choice in the perioperative setting. Dove Medical Press 2017-10-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5644537/ /pubmed/29066932 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/LRA.S141233 Text en © 2017 Pierce et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Pierce, John T Kositratna, Guy Attiah, Mark A Kallan, Michael J Koenigsberg, Rebecca Syre, Peter Wyler, David Marcotte, Paul J Kofke, W Andrew Welch, William C Efficiency of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of 544 patients |
title | Efficiency of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of 544 patients |
title_full | Efficiency of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of 544 patients |
title_fullStr | Efficiency of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of 544 patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficiency of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of 544 patients |
title_short | Efficiency of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of 544 patients |
title_sort | efficiency of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for lumbar spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of 544 patients |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5644537/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29066932 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/LRA.S141233 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT piercejohnt efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients AT kositratnaguy efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients AT attiahmarka efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients AT kallanmichaelj efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients AT koenigsbergrebecca efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients AT syrepeter efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients AT wylerdavid efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients AT marcottepaulj efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients AT kofkewandrew efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients AT welchwilliamc efficiencyofspinalanesthesiaversusgeneralanesthesiaforlumbarspinalsurgeryaretrospectiveanalysisof544patients |