Neuraxial anaesthesia for lower-limb revascularization

The Type of Anesthesia Technique Does Not Have an Impact on 30-Day Mortality in Geriatric Patients Undergoing Lower Extremity Amputation

This study aimed to determine the appropriate anesthetic technique for patients who underwent amputation due to peripheral vascular disease. The anesthetic technique to be applied during lower extremity amputations in geriatric patients with limited functional capacity may be important in terms of clinical outcomes and mortality rates. Patients aged older than 65 years who had undergone major lower extremity amputation were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were divided into 2 groups: regional anesthesia (RA) and general anesthesia (GA). Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, medications used, anesthesia technique, the durations of anesthesia and surgery, need for blood transfusion, 30-day mortality, postoperative cardiac and pulmonary complication rates were recorded from the medical records of the patients. Among the 441 patients, 244 had received RA, while 197 had received GA. The average length of stay in the hospital was longer in the GA group (P = 0.001). The use of antiplatelet drugs (P = 0.001) and the number of transfusions were higher (P = 0.045) in the GA group. No significant difference was found between the groups in terms of mortality and postoperative cardiac or pulmonary complication rates. We determined that the anesthesia technique does not have an effect on 30-day mortality and complication rates. The regional anesthesia technique may be preferred in geriatric patients who will undergo major lower extremity amputation because of the shorter hospital stay and theoretical advantages. However, considering the general functional status of patients, the importance of patient-based evaluation should not be forgotten.

Neuraxial blockade for the prevention of postoperative mortality and major morbidity: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Various beneficial effects derived from neuraxial blocks have been reported. However, it is unclear whether these effects have an influence on perioperative mortality and major pulmonary/cardiovascular complications.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to summarize Cochrane systematic reviews that assess the effects of neuraxial blockade on perioperative rates of death, chest infection and myocardial infarction by integrating the evidence from all such reviews that have compared neuraxial blockade with or without general anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia alone for different types of surgery in various populations. Our secondary objective was to summarize the evidence on adverse effects (an adverse event for which a causal relation between the intervention and the event is at least a reasonable possibility) of neuraxial blockade. Within the reviews, studies were selected using the same criteria.

METHODS

A search was performed in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on July 13, 2012. We have (1) included all Cochrane systematic reviews that examined participants of any age undergoing any type of surgical (open or endoscopic) procedure, (2) compared neuraxial blockade versus general anaesthesia alone for surgical anaesthesia or neuraxial blockade plus general anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia alone for surgical anaesthesia and (3) included death, chest infection, myocardial infarction and/or serious adverse events as outcomes. Neuraxial blockade could consist of epidural, caudal, spinal or combined spinal-epidural techniques administered as a bolus or by continuous infusion. Studies included in these reviews were selected on the basis of the same criteria. Reviews and studies were selected independently by two review authors, who independently performed data extraction when data differed from one of the selected reviews. Data were analysed by using Review Manager Version 5.1 and Comprehensive Meta Analysis Version 2.2.044.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine Cochrane reviews were selected for this overview. Their scores on the Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire varied from four to six of a maximal possible score of seven. Compared with general anaesthesia, neuraxial blockade reduced the zero to 30-day mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53 to 0.94; I(2) = 0%) based on 20 studies that included 3006 participants. Neuraxial blockade also decreased the risk of pneumonia (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.79; I(2) = 0%) based on five studies that included 400 participants. No difference was detected in the risk of myocardial infarction between the two techniques (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.37; I(2) = 0%) based on six studies with 849 participants. Compared with general anaesthesia alone, the addition of a neuraxial block to general anaesthesia did not affect the zero to 30-day mortality (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.51; I(2) = 0%) based on 18 studies with 3228 participants. No difference was detected in the risk of myocardial infarction between combined neuraxial blockade-general anaesthesia and general anaesthesia alone (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.09; I(2) = 0%) based on eight studies that included 1580 participants. The addition of a neuraxial block to general anaesthesia reduced the risk of pneumonia (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.98; I(2) = 9%) after adjustment for publication bias and based on nine studies that included 2433 participants. The quality of the evidence was judged as moderate for all six comparisons.No serious adverse events (seizure or cardiac arrest related to local anaesthetic toxicity, prolonged central or peripheral neurological injury lasting longer than one month or infection secondary to neuraxial blockade) were reported. The quality of the reporting score of complications related to neuraxial blocks was nine (four to 12 (median range)) of a possible maximum score of 14.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with general anaesthesia, a central neuraxial block may reduce the zero to 30-day mortality for patients undergoing surgery with intermediate to high cardiac risk (level of evidence, moderate). Further research is required.

Neuraxial anaesthesia for lower-limb revascularization

BACKGROUND

Lower-limb revascularization is a surgical procedure that is performed to restore an adequate blood supply to the limbs. Lower-limb revascularization surgery is used to reduce pain and sometimes to improve lower-limb function. Neuraxial anaesthesia is an anaesthetic technique that uses local anaesthetics next to the spinal cord to block nerve function. Neuraxial anaesthesia may lead to improved survival. This systematic review was originally published in 2010 and was first updated in 2011 and again in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the rates of death and major complications associated with spinal and epidural anaesthesia as compared with other types of anaesthesia for lower-limb revascularization in patients aged 18 years or older who are affected by obstruction of lower-limb vessels.

SEARCH METHODS

The original review was published in 2010 and was based on a search until June 2008. In 2011 we reran the search until February 2011 and updated the review. For this second updated version of the review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and Web of Science from 2011 to April 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials comparing neuraxial anaesthesia (spinal or epidural anaesthesia) versus other types of anaesthesia in adults (18 years or older) with arterial vascular obstruction undergoing lower-limb revascularization surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed data extraction and assessed trial quality. We pooled the data on mortality, myocardial infarction, lower-limb amputation and pneumonia. We summarized dichotomous data as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated version of the review, we found no new studies that met our inclusion criteria. We included in this review four studies that compared neuraxial anaesthesia with general anaesthesia. The total number of participants was 696, of whom 417 were allocated to neuraxial anaesthesia and 279 to general anaesthesia. Participants allocated to neuraxial anaesthesia had a mean age of 67 years, and 59% were men. Participants allocated to general anaesthesia had a mean age of 67 years, and 66% were men. Four studies had an unclear risk of bias. No difference was observed between participants allocated to neuraxial or general anaesthesia in mortality rate (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.07; 696 participants; four trials), myocardial infarction (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.56 to 2.70; 696 participants; four trials), and lower-limb amputation (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.84; 465 participants; three trials). Pneumonia was less common after neuraxial anaesthesia than after general anaesthesia (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.89; 201 participants; two trials). Evidence was insufficient for cerebral stroke, duration of hospital stay, postoperative cognitive dysfunction, complications in the anaesthetic recovery room and transfusion requirements. No data described nerve dysfunction, postoperative wound infection, patient satisfaction, postoperative pain score, claudication distance and pain at rest.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence from included trials that compared neuraxial anaesthesia with general anaesthesia was insufficient to rule out clinically important differences for most clinical outcomes. Neuraxial anaesthesia may reduce pneumonia. No conclusions can be drawn with regard to mortality, myocardial infarction and rate of lower-limb amputation, or less common outcomes.

Regional anesthesia for vascular surgery

Vascular surgical patients are a diverse group of patients who tend to be elderly, with multiple comorbidities, while vascular procedures may involve significant blood loss and ischemia of tissues beyond the arterial obstruction. Regional anesthesia techniques may offer benefits to patients undergoing vascular surgery because of their cardiorespiratory comorbidities. However, this group of patients is commonly receiving multiple medications, including anticoagulants, so regional techniques are not without risks. This review will discuss this topic based around 3 fundamental revascularization procedures, carotid, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, and infrainguinal surgery, discussing the clinical applications of regional techniques relevant to each key area.

Neuraxial anesthesia compared to general anesthesia for procedures on the lower half of the body: systematic review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Systematic reviews organize literature data by combining results from published studies in order to resolve conflicts in the area of medical knowledge describing the interventions. The inadequate reporting of systematic reviews can damage the credibility and interfere in the results' quality. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of good quality systematic reviews comparing neuraxial anesthesia with general anesthesia for procedures on the lower half of the body.

METHODS

Systematic review of systematic reviews. Primary variable: The frequency of good quality systematic reviews. The information was analyzed from the following databases: LILACS (January 1982 to December 2010); PubMed (January 1950 to December 2010); The Cochrane Database of Systematic Review and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (volume 10, 2010); and SciELO (December 2010). The quality of systematic reviews was determined by the Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire. The sample size calculation showed that it was necessary to analyze eight systematic reviews, taking into account that the frequency of good quality systematic reviews was 5%, an absolute precision of 15%, and a significance level of 5%.

RESULTS

Were identified 1,995 articles. The selection process eliminated 1,968 articles. Twenty-seven articles of systematic reviews were read in full, 9 were excluded due to incompatibility with the inclusion criteria, and 8 were duplicate publications. Ten systematic reviews were assessed for their quality. The frequency of good quality systematic reviews was 40% (4/10; 95% CI 9.6 to 70.4%).

CONCLUSION

The frequency of good quality systematic reviews was 40%.

Consensus Statements Regarding the Multidisciplinary Care of Limb Amputation Patients in Disasters or Humanitarian Emergencies: Report of the 2011 Humanitarian Action Summit Surgical Working Group on Amputations Following Disasters or Conflict

Limb amputations are frequently performed as a result of trauma inflicted during conflict or disasters. As demonstrated during the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, coordinating care of these patients in austere settings is complex. During the 2011 Humanitarian Action Summit, consensus statements were developed for international organizations providing care to limb amputation patients during disasters or humanitarian emergencies. Expanded planning is needed for a multidisciplinary surgical care team, inclusive of surgeons, anesthesiologists, rehabilitation specialists and mental health professionals. Surgical providers should approach amputation using an operative technique that optimizes limb length and prosthetic fitting. Appropriate anesthesia care involves both peri-operative and long-term pain control. Rehabilitation specialists must be involved early in treatment, ideally before amputation, and should educate the surgical team in prosthetic considerations. Mental health specialists must be included to help the patient with community reintegration. A key step in developing local health systemsis the establishment of surgical outcomes monitoring. Such monitoring can optimizepatient follow-up and foster professional accountability for the treatment of amputation patients in disaster settings and humanitarian emergencies.