Peripheral Nerve Block Anesthesia Research Articles

Effect of peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia on the hemodynamics and prognosis of diabetic patients undergoing diabetic foot Surgery

BackgroundDiabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) represent a significant foot-related concern for patients with multiple co-morbidities, and surgical intervention is often employed. Notably, peripheral nerve block anesthesia (PNB) has emerged as a new approach for the surgical management of DFUs, providing sustained hemodynamic stability and superior postoperative pain control compared to general anesthesia (GEA).MethodsThe present study utilized a retrospective analysis of hospitalized patients who met the inclusion criteria for DFUs over a period of 7 years. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the type of anesthesia employed during the procedure: GEA or PNB. Extensive patient information was gathered and analyzed, such as demographics, intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, numeric rating scale (NRS) scores, and healing outcomes. The preliminary results assessed in this study were intraoperative hemodynamic stability and postoperative analgesic efficacy.ResultsDuring the study period, 117 patients received surgical therapy based on GEA, while 145 patients received PNB. Notably, the mean intraoperative blood pressure was significantly lower in the GEA group, and this difference remained statistically significant even after Bonferroni adjustment using linear mixed models. Additionally, the frequency of hypotensive episodes was higher in the GEA group (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the perioperative transfusion volume, overall intraoperative fluid input, and intraoperative bleeding volume were significantly more significant in the GEA group than in the PNB group. The postoperative pain NRS scores differed considerably between the two groups (Bonferroni corrected P < 0.01), with the GEA group exhibiting higher opioid consumption on the day of surgery and the first postoperative day when using patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA). Supplemental analgesic medication was more significant in the GEA group 24 h postoperatively. However, the two groups had no difference in hospital stay or treatment outcomes. There was no difference between the two groups regarding secondary surgery and amputation procedures. Although the 5-year mortality rate is 30.5%, no significant difference in mortality rates between the two groups was observed.ConclusionsCompared to GEA, PNB is a safe and effective alternative therapy for managing DFUs. Our findings suggest that PNB administration during surgical intervention for this condition results in more stable intraoperative hemodynamics and superior postoperative analgesic effects, despite no significant difference in overall treatment outcomes between the two groups. The two groups did not differ in re-surgery, amputation, or 5-year mortality.

Comparison of a Peripheral Nerve Block versus Spinal Anesthesia in Foot or Ankle Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with a Trial Sequential Analysis.

Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis (TSA) aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) and spinal anesthesia (SA) in elective foot and ankle surgery. Methods: The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021229597). Researchers independently searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results: Analysis of nine RCTs (n = 802; 399 PNBs, 403 SA) revealed significantly shorter block performance times (WMD: 7.470; 95% CI 6.072 to 8.868), the onset of sensory (WMD: 7.483; 95% CI 2.837 to 12.130) and motor blocks (WMD: 9.071; 95% CI 4.049 to 14.094), durations of sensory (WMD: 458.53; 95% CI 328.296 to 588.765) and motor blocks (WMD: 247.416; 95% CI 95.625 to 399.208), and significantly higher postoperative analgesic requirements (SMD: -1.091; 95% CI -1.634 to -0.549) in the SA group. Additionally, systolic blood pressure (SBP) at 30 min (WMD: 13.950; 95% CI 4.603 to 23.298) was lower in the SA group. Conclusions: The SA demonstrated shorter block performance time, faster onset and shorter duration of sensory and motor blocks, higher postoperative analgesic requirements, and lower SBP at 30 min compared to PNBs in elective foot and ankle surgery.

Pain management in postoperative bone fracture patients: A systematic scoping review

Background: A fracture is a condition in which the continuity of bone tissue is broken, causing stress and pain during the healing process. Therefore, the management of pain in postoperative bone fracture patients should be addressed.. Objective: The aim is to identify interventions for managing pain in patients with postoperative bone fractures. Design: A systematic scoping review. Data Sources: The search process was conducted from March 8 to March 15, 2022, using the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, and Science Direct. Review Methods: PRISMA flowcharts were used for the systematic review. Articles published in the last five years (2018-2022) were included, focusing on full-text articles, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and cohort studies that discussed the topic of postoperative pain management in fracture patients. The search yielded a total of 4,324 articles from the four databases. After screening by year, 819 articles were obtained. Based on the full text and abstracts of 432 articles, and applying exclusion and inclusion criteria, five articles were selected. Results: The five articles demonstrated that pain management in postoperative bone fracture patients can be achieved through various pharmacological approaches, including peripheral nerve block anesthesia, antioxidants (vitamin C), intravenous tranexamic acid, intravenous dexamethasone, and the use of calculators and comprehensive pain plans as management tools. Conclusions: This study recommends that healthcare professionals apply and further develop the findings as a pain management strategy for postoperative bone fracture patients.

Functional recovery with peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia for upper limb surgery: a systematic review

BackgroundPeripheral nerve block is a common anesthetic technique used during orthopedic upper limb surgery. Injection of local anesthetics around the target nerve inhibits the action of voltage-dependent sodium channels, inhibiting neurotransmission of pain impulses and providing motor immobility. Compared to general anesthesia, it could improve functional recovery by inhibiting nociceptive impulses and inflammation, thus reducing postoperative pain and immobilization and improving postoperative rehabilitation. This systematic review evaluates the impact of peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia on postoperative functional recovery following orthopedic upper limb surgery.MethodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINHAL, EMBASE, and Scopus trial databases from inception until September 2021 for studies comparing peripheral nerve block to general anesthesia. We collected data on functional recovery, range of motion, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and return to work. We pooled studies using a random-effects model and summarized the quality of evidence with the GRADE approach.ResultsWe assessed 373 citations and 19 full-text articles for eligibility, and included six studies. Six studies reported on functional recovery, but failed to detect a significant superiority of peripheral nerve block over general anesthesia (3 RCT studies, N = 160; SMD -0.15; CI at 95% -0.60–0.3; I2 = 45%; p = 0.07; low quality of evidence and 3 observational studies, N = 377; SMD -0.35; CI at 95% -0.71–0.01; I2 = 64%; p = 0.06; very low quality of evidence).ConclusionsCurrent literature is limited and fails to identify the benefit of peripheral nerve block on functional recovery. More studies are needed to assess the impact on long-term recovery. Considering the potential impact on clinical practice and training, a prospective study on functional recovery is ongoing (NCT04541745).Trial registrationPROSPERO ID CRD42018116298. Registered on December 4, 2018.

Peripheral Nerve Block Versus Spinal Anesthesia for Total Knee Replacement in Elderly Patients

Abstract Spinal anesthesia and peripheral nerve block anesthesia are used in total knee replacement. The aim of the study was to examine whether peripheral nerve block anesthesia would provide a more stable hemodynamic profile and analgesic effect in elderly patients undergoing total knee replacement, as compared to spinal anesthesia. This is a single-center case-control trial, with patients from our prospectively followed registry. The patients were divided into two groups, those with peripheral nerve block anesthesia and spinal anesthesia. Propensity score analysis was performed in 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was analgesia with total analgesic effect and the secondary outcome was intraoperative hemodynamic status. The patients in peripheral nerve block anesthesia group had a longer length of analgesia (606.19±219.35 vs 359.48±106.82, P&lt;0.01) and pain scores during 24h and 48h after the surgery were lower in the same group of patients (3.21±1.74 vs 5.02±2.23, P=0.037; 3.03±1.57 vs 5.67±2.51, P=0.028). Spinal anesthesia group had a larger number of patients with significant hypotension (3.84% vs 15.38%, P=0.01), as well as a larger number of patients who received vasopressors (0% vs 9.61%, P&lt;0.01). Both anesthesia methods demonstrated sufficient analgesic efficacy in total knee replacement, although there was less pain severity and longer analgesic effect of peripheral nerve block anesthesia in patients who were 60 years old or older. Spinal anesthesia showed a significantly higher degree of hypotension than in those patients receivingperipheral nerve block anesthesia.

Comparing the effects of peripheral nerve block and general anesthesia with general anesthesia alone on postoperative delirium and complications in elderly patients: a retrospective cohort study using a nationwide database

IntroductionThe difference between the effects of peripheral nerve block (PNB) with general anesthesia (GA) and GA alone on the patients’ postoperative clinical outcomes remains unknown. We assessed whether there is...

Comparison of Peripheral Nerve Block and Spinal Anesthesia in Terms of Postoperative Mortality and Walking Ability in Elderly Hip Fracture Patients

Comparison of Peripheral Nerve Block and Spinal Anesthesia in Terms of Postoperative Mortality and Walking Ability in Elderly Hip Fracture Patients

Local infiltration analgesia versus peripheral nerve block anaesthesia in total knee arthroplasty: a pharmaco-economic comparison

BackgroundA superior analgesic method in perioperative pain-management of patients receiving total knee arthroplasty is the subject of controversial debate. Although higher cost-efficiency is claimed for the local infiltration analgesia (LIA), there is a lack of data on its costs compared to peripheral nerve block anaesthesia (PNBA). The goal of this study was to investigate the differences in immediate perioperative costs between the LIA and PNBA in treatment of patients receiving total knee arthroplasty.MethodsThe comparison was conducted based on a randomized controlled clinical trial examining 40 patients with elective, primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA, 20 patients with LIA and 20 patients with PNBA). The analysis included surgical case costs, anaesthesiological case costs, material, costs of postoperative opioid requirements and catheter review visits for patients receiving PNBA.ResultsThe overall mean costs for the LIA-group were 4328.72€ and 4368.12€ for the PNBA (p = 0.851). While there was no statistically significant difference in surgical case costs, the anaesthesiological costs were lower with the LIA procedure (1370.26€ vs. 1542.45€, p = 0.048). Material costs in the LIA group were 4.18€/patient and 94.64€/patient with the PNBA. Costs for postoperative opioid requirements showed no statistically significant difference between the two procedures.ConclusionsThere is no relevant difference in immediate perioperative costs between LIA and PNBA. Shorter induction times lead to lower anaesthesiological case costs with the LIA. Overall economic aspects seem to play a less important role for determining an adequate procedure for perioperative pain management.Trial registrationThe study was approved by the ethics-review-board of Charité Hospital Berlin (Ethikausschuss 4, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, on 16th February 2017) and registered with data safety authorities. Study patients provided written informed consent to participate in the trial. Study registry: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03114306.

Epinephrine and Dexamethasone as Adjuvants in Upper Extremity Peripheral Nerve Blocks in Pediatric Patients.

Introduction: Regional anesthesia in children in recent years has been accepted worldwide. The increased interest in it is partly due to the use of ultrasonography which provides confidence and accuracy to the anesthesiologic team. Adjuvants are used to extend the duration of the sensory and motor blocking, limiting the cumulative dose of local anesthetics. The use of adjuvants in peripheral nerve blocks in the pediatric population is still under research. Aim: To observe the effect of epinephrine and dexamethasone as adjuvants to local anesthetics in peripheral upper extremity nerve blocks in pediatric patients. Materials and methods: The study included 63 patients, aged group 4-14 years, admitted to the University Clinic of Pediatric Surgery for surgical treatment of upper limb fractures in the period of January 2020 until March 2021. Patients were randomized into three groups, and all patients in the groups received analgo-sedation prior to peripheral nerve block. Patients in group 1 (21 patients) received supraclavicular, or interscalene block with 2 ml lidocaine 2% and bupivacaine 0.25% (max 2mg/kg) with a total volume of 0.5ml/kg. In group 2, the patients (21) received 25 μg of epinephrine in 2 ml of 2% solution of lidocaine and 0.25% bupivacaine (max 2 mg/kg) with a total volume of 0.5 ml/kg, and in group 3, the patients (21) received 2% lidocaine 2ml and 0.25% bupivacaine (max 2mg/kg) in combination with 2mg dexamethasone with a total volume of 0.5ml/kg. Results: Results showed that in patients in group 1, the average duration of the sensory block was 7 hours, while the duration of the motor block was 5 hours and 30 minutes. In group 2 (epinephrine), the durations of both sensory and motor block were prolonged for about 30 minutes on average compared to the first group. In group 3 (dexamethasone) the duration of the sensory and motor block was significantly longer compared with the first two groups (p<0.0001). Conclusion: Epinephrine and dexamethasone prolong the duration of action of local anesthetics in peripheral nerve blocks of the upper extremity in pediatric patients and thus reduce the need for analgesics in the postoperative period.

Comparison of patient and surgeon satisfaction in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy with peripheral nerve block versus spinal anesthesia

Objective. This study aims to compare two different methods of regional anesthesia applied for knee arthroscopy in terms of patient and surgeon satisfaction. Materials and Methods. Eighty patients who underwent knee arthroscopy either with spinal anesthesia (SA) or unilateral sciatic and femoral nerve block (SFNB) were included in the study. A nurse conducted a blind study questionnaire to assess the surgeon and patient satisfaction from anesthesia performed at the end of the surgery. Pain score, demographical data, duration of surgery, motor and sensory block duration, time of first rescue analgesia were recorded and analyzed statistically. Results. A statistically significant difference was found between the patient (p = 0.001; p &lt;0.01) and surgeon (p = 0.022; p &lt;0.05) satisfaction rates, these being lower in the group with SFNB comparable to patients with spinal anesthesia. There was a statistically significant difference between the first analgesic requirements of the patients according to the groups (p = 0.001; p &lt;0.01). The first analgesic requirement of the patients who received SFNB was later than in the case of patients who received spinal anesthesia. Conclusions. Patient and surgeon satisfaction with SA was significantly higher than SFNB. The peripheral nerve blocks are inadequate for patient and surgeon satisfaction for knee arthroscopy compared to SA.

COVID-19: Regional Anesthesia, Benefits, and Practical Recommendations.

During coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, efforts have been made to rethink the health system and provide various recommendations to the best care of patients and for the protection of health personnel. In patients with suspicion or confirmation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) who require surgical intervention and anesthetic management, strategies must be established to minimize aerosol-generating procedures. Regional anesthesia (RA) is not considered an aerosol-generating procedure per se and is currently proposed such as a safe strategy and part of comprehensive perioperative care. However, the preoperative evaluation has undergone changes in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, so in addition to routine preoperative evaluation, a patient-oriented history, clinical, laboratory, and radiologic evaluation should be performed, and a series of general recommendations should be taken into account before, during, and after the performance of RA procedure. A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases was performed until August 22, 2020, using the words: 〞regional anesthesia or nerve block or peripheral nerve block or spinal anesthesia or epidural anesthesia and SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 or MERS or SARS-CoV-1 or influenza.〞 We included in this review all articles, regardless of design, published in the English language. Given the benefits reported with the use of RA techniques, both for the patient and for healthcare personnel, it has recently been suggested that RA should be considered as the first choice. However, it is important to generate more precise and homogeneous management guidelines based on the evidence obtained every day during the care of patients with COVID-19.

The Use of Magnesium Sulfate and Peripheral Nerve Blocks: An Updated Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.

With the popularization of ultrasound, nerve blocks have been widely implemented in current clinical practice. Although, they have seen limited success due to their shorter duration and suboptimal analgesia. Magnesium sulfate as a local anesthetic adjuvant for peripheral nerve blocks could enhance the effects of local anesthetics. However, previous investigations have not thoroughly investigated the analgesic efficacy of magnesium sulfate as an adjunct to local anesthetics for peripheral nerve blocks. Thus, we attempted to fill the gap in the existing literature by conducting a meta-analysis. We performed of a quantitative systematic review of randomized controlled trials published between May 30, 2011 and November 1, 2018. Inclusion criteria were: (1) magnesium sulfate used as adjuvant mixed with local anesthetic for nerve blockade, (2) complete articles and published abstracts of randomized controlled trials, (3) English language. The primary outcome measures were time of onset, total duration of the sensory blockade, and Visual Analog Scale pain scores. The secondary outcomes were postoperative oral and intravenous analgesics consumption and the incidence of nausea and vomiting. The 21 trials analyzed in this study included 1323 patients. Magnesium sulfate effectively prolonged the total duration of sensory blockade (mean difference [MD]=114.59 min, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 89.31-139.88), reducing Visual Analog Scale pain scores at 6 hours (MD=1.36 points, 95% CI: -2.09 to -0.63) and 12 hours (MD=1.54 points, 95% CI: -2.56 to -0.53) postsurgery. Magnesium sulfate also effectively reduced postoperative analgesic use within 24 hours postsurgery (standard MD=-2.06, 95% CI: -2.67 to -1.35). Furthermore, adjuvant magnesium sulfate significantly reduced the incidence of nausea and vomiting after transversus abdominis plane blockade (odds ratio: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.18-0.81). Adjuvant magnesium sulfate enhanced the anesthetic effects of local anesthetics and improved postoperative analgesia following the perineural blockade.

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.

PurposeTo 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.MethodsPatients ≥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.ResultsThree 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.ConclusionPNB 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.

Enhanced Post-Operative Recovery with Continuous Peripheral Nerve Block After Lower Extremity Amputation

Despite progress in perioperative care standards, there has not been a significant risk reduction in morbidity and mortality rates of lower extremity amputations, an intermediate risk surgery performed on high risk patients. The single-shot peripheral nerve block has shown equivocal impact on postoperative course following lower extremity amputation. Hence, we assessed the potential of preemptive use of continuous catheter-based peripheral nerve block in lower extremity amputations for reduction in pulmonary complications, acute post-operative pain scores, and opioid use in post-operative period. A retrospective review of a quality improvement project initiated in 2018 was conducted to compare outcomes amongst general anesthesia in combination with a catheter-based peripheral nerve block (catheter group) and general anesthesia alone in patients receiving lower extremity amputation. The rate of postoperative pulmonary complications was identified as a primary endpoint. The secondary outcomes assessed were acute post-operative pain scores and opioid consumption up to 48 hours. Our analysis was adjusted for potential confounding variables inclusive of demographics, medical comorbidities, type of surgical procedure and smoking status. Ninety-six patients were included in the study (61 in the general anesthesia group, 35 in the catheter group). After adjusting for baseline demographics, comorbidities, surgical technique and smoking status, the odds of postoperative pulmonary complications were significantly lower with catheter-based peripheral nerve block in comparison to general anesthesia alone, OR 0.11 [95% CI, 0.01- 0.88] (P = 0.048). The decrease in acute pain scores was also observed in the catheter group when compared to general anesthesia alone, OR 0.72 [95% CI, 0.56 - 0.93] (P = 0.012). Similarly, the opioid consumption was also lower in the catheter group in comparison to general anesthesia alone, OR 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95 - 0.99] (P = 0.025). Preemptive use of continuous peripheral nerve block in patients undergoing lower extremity amputation reduces the incidence of pulmonary complications, acute postoperative pain scores and narcotic use in post-operative period.

Peripheral nerve block anaesthesia and postoperative pain in acute ankle fracture surgery: the AnAnkle randomised trial

BackgroundPeripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) are increasingly popular in acute ankle fracture surgery but rebound pain may outweigh the benefits. The AnAnkle Trial was designed to assess the postoperative pain profile of PNB anaesthesia compared with spinal anaesthesia (SA). MethodsThe AnAnkle Trial was a randomised, two-centre, blinded outcome analysis trial. Eligible adults booked for primary ankle fracture surgery were randomised to PNB or SA. The PNBs were ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic and saphenous blocks with ropivacaine and SAs were with hyperbaric bupivacaine. Postoperatively, all subjects received paracetamol, ibuprofen, and patient-controlled i.v. morphine for pain. The primary endpoint was 27 h Pain Intensity and Opioid Consumption (PIOC) score. Secondary endpoints included longitudinal pain scores and morphine consumption separately, and questionnaires on quality of recovery. ResultsThis study enrolled 150 subjects, and the PNB success rate was >94%. PIOC was lower with PNB anaesthesia (median, –26.5% vs +54.3%; P<0.001) and the probability of a better PIOC score with PNB than with SA was 74.8% (95% confidence interval, 67.0–82.6). Pain scores and morphine consumption analysed separately also yielded a clear benefit with PNB, despite substantial rebound pain when PNBs subsided. Quality of recovery scores were similar between groups, but 99% having PNB vs 90% having SA would choose the same anaesthesia form again (P=0.03). ConclusionsPNB anaesthesia was efficient and provided a superior postoperative pain profile compared with SA for acute ankle fracture surgery, despite potentially intense rebound pain after PNB. Clinical trial registrationClinicaltrialsregister.eu, EudraCT number: 2015-001108-76.

Swedish Web Version of the Quality of Recovery Scale Adapted for Patients Undergoing Local Anesthesia and Peripheral Nerve Blockade (SwQoR-LA): Prospective Psychometric Evaluation Study.

BackgroundThe frequency and timing of assessing patient symptoms and discomfort during postoperative recovery are goals. Therefore, real-time recovery evaluation has been suggested to identify specific deficits in patient recovery.ObjectiveThis study aimed to psychometrically evaluate the Swedish Web Version of the Quality of Recovery (SwQoR) Scale adapted for patients undergoing local and peripheral nerve block (SwQoR-LA).MethodsThis was a secondary analysis of a psychometric evaluation of 107 patients aged ≥18 years undergoing day surgery under local or peripheral nerve block anesthesia at 4 different day surgery departments in Sweden. The SwQoR-LA, available through a mobile app called Recovery Assessment by Phone Points (RAPP), was completed daily on postoperative days 1-7.ResultsSome evidence of construct validity was supported, and discriminant validity was found in 7 of 8 items related to general anesthesia. The internal consistency was acceptable (.87-.89), and the split-half reliability was 0.80-0.86. Cohen d effect size was 0.98, and the percentage of change from baseline was 43.4%. No floor nor ceiling effects were found.ConclusionsThe SwQoR-LA is valid, reliable, responsive, and clinically feasible for digital real-time recovery assessment of patient recovery to identify specific deficits in patient recovery and detect those patients who might benefit from a timely intervention.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02492191; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02492191International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009901

Lumbar-Sacral Plexus Block Anesthesia versus General Anesthesia for Total Hip Arthroplasty: Case Control Study

Background: Peripheral block techniques for total hip arthroplasty have been used as an analgesic strategy, only a few studies described it as an anesthetic technique, so the perioperative performance and safety are poorly studied. Methods: 78 total hip arthroplasties were prospectively observed in our hospital. Divided into 2 groups: 1) General anesthesia; and 2) Lumbar sacral plexus block anesthesia. Variables measured in both groups were: demographics, conversion to general anesthesia, total opioid doses, surgical time, blood loss, postoperative pain, use and total dose of vasopressors drugs, transfusion and ICU transfer needs, postoperative ambulation time, and length of hospital stay. T student and chi-square tests were used upon the case. A significant difference was considered when a value of p Results: 3 patients (7.3%) anesthetized with combined lumbar sacral plexus block were converted to general anesthesia. When comparing peripheral nerve block and general anesthesia, less intraoperative (p = 0.000) and postoperative (p = 0.002) opioid consumption were noted, less postoperative pain in PACU (p = 0.002) and in the first 24 hours (p = 0.005), as well as earlier onset of ambulation (p = 0.008) and shorter hospital stay (p = 0.031). Conclusions: In our study, the lumbar and sacral plexus block anesthesia technique provided anesthetic conditions to perform hip joint arthroplasty and it was proved to be advantageous in comparison to general anesthesia.

Neuraxial anaesthesia is associated with improved outcomes and reduced postoperative complications in patients undergoing aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty.

As the incidence of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) continues to increase, revision THA (rTHA) is becoming an increasingly common procedure. rTHA is widely regarded as a more challenging procedure, with higher complication rates and increased medical, social and economic burdens when compared to its primary counterpart. Given the complexity of rTHA and the projected increase in incidence of these procedures, patient optimisation is becoming of interest to improve outcomes. Anaesthetic choice has been extensively studied in primary THA as a modifiable risk factor for postoperative outcomes, showing favourable results for neuraxial anaesthesia compared to general anaesthesia. The impact of anaesthetic choice in rTHA has not been studied previously. A retrospective study was performed using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients who underwent rTHA between 2014 and 2017 were divided into 3 anaesthesia cohorts: general anaesthesia, neuraxial anaesthesia, and combined general-regional (neuraxial and/or peripheral nerve block) anaesthesia. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to analyse patient characteristics and 30-day postoperative outcomes. Bonferroni correction was applied for post-hoc analysis. In total, 5759 patients were identified. Of these, 3551 (61.7%) patients underwent general anaesthesia, 1513 (26.3%) patients underwent neuraxial anaesthesia, and 695 (12.1%) patients underwent combined general-regional anaesthesia. On multivariate analysis, neuraxial anaesthesia was associated with decreased odds for any-one complication (OR 0.635; p < 0.001), perioperative blood transfusion (OR 0.641; p < 0.001), and extended length of stay (OR 0.005; p = 0.005) compared to general anaesthesia. Relative to those receiving general anaesthesia, patients undergoing neuraxial anaesthesia are at decreased risk for postoperative complications, perioperative blood transfusions, and extended length of stay. Prospective controlled trials should be conducted to verify these findings.

Adjuncts to Local Anesthetics for Peripheral Nerve Blocks: A Review of Current Literature

Adjuncts to Local Anesthetics for Peripheral Nerve Blocks: A Review of Current Literature

Comparing outcomes after peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia for lower extremity amputation: a nationwide exploratory retrospective cohort study in Japan

Background and objectivesThe health benefits of peripheral nerve block (PNB) on postoperative complications after lower extremity amputation (LEA) compared with general anesthesia (GA) remains controversial. We performed a retrospective propensity...