Epidural versus general anesthesia: does anesthetic management influence early infrainguinal graft thrombosis?

Anesthetic management for lower extremity vascular bypass procedures: The impact of general or regional anesthesia on clinical outcomes

PURPOSE

Postoperative complications after major surgery, especially vascular procedures, are associated with a significant increase in costs and mortality. Previous studies evaluating general anesthesia versus regional or neuraxial anesthesia for infrainguinal bypass have produced conflicting results. The main aim of the present study is to review current evidence on the application of regional or general anesthesia in patients undergoing infrainguinal bypass surgery and its potential favorable effects on postoperative outcomes.

CONTENTS

Patients undergoing vascular surgery often have multiple comorbidities, and it is important to outline both benefits and risks of regional anesthesia techniques. Neuraxial anesthesia in vascular surgery allows overall avoidance of general anesthesia and does provide short-term benefits beyond analgesia. Previous observational studies suggest that neuraxial anesthesia for lower limb revascularization may reduce morbidity and length of stay. However, evidence of long-term benefits is lacking in most procedures and further work is still warranted.

CONCLUSIONS

Neuraxial anesthesia is usually an effective anesthesia technique for infrainguinal bypass surgery. Elderly patients and those with underlying respiratory problems may display some benefit from neuraxial anesthesia. Further evaluation within institutions should be performed to identify which patients would most benefit from regional techniques. Notably, systemic antithrombotic and anticoagulation therapy is common among this population and may affect anesthetic choices.

Outcomes After Neuraxial or Regional Anaesthesia Instead of General Anaesthesia for Lower Limb Revascularisation Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised and Non-Randomised Studies

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether receipt of neuraxial or regional anaesthesia instead of general anaesthesia for lower limb revascularisation surgery affects patient outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, and Google Scholar.

REVIEW METHODS

After protocol registration, the data sources were searched for randomised and non-randomised studies comparing neuraxial or regional anaesthesia with general anaesthesia for lower limb revascularisation surgery in adults. Two investigators independently selected articles, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. Data were pooled using random effects models. GRADE was used to assess certainty in cumulative evidence.

RESULTS

From 10 755 citations identified, five randomised (n = 970) and 13 non-randomised (n = 96 800) studies were included. Use of neuraxial instead of general anaesthesia for lower limb revascularisation surgery was associated with no statistically significant reduction in short term (in hospital or 30 day) mortality in randomised studies (pooled odds ratio [OR] 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33 - 1.81; low certainty) and a statistically significant reduction in adjusted short term mortality in non-randomised studies (pooled OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.56 - 0.81; low certainty). Adults allocated to neuraxial anaesthesia in randomised studies had fewer pulmonary complications (pooled OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.16 - 0.76; low certainty). In non-randomised studies, neuraxial instead of general anaesthesia was associated with a lower adjusted odds of any morbidity (pooled OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.52 - 0.84), cardiac complications (pooled OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.58 - 0.79), pneumonia (pooled OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.64 - 1.02), prolonged mechanical ventilation (OR 0.09; 95% CI 0.002 - 0.55), and bypass graft thrombosis (OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.59 - 0.85), as well as a shorter operative duration (low certainty for all). Use of a nerve block instead of general anaesthesia was associated with a lower adjusted odds of delirium (OR 0.16; 95% CI 0.06 - 0.42) and a shorter operative duration (low certainty for both).

CONCLUSION

Randomised and non-randomised data suggest that neuraxial anaesthesia for lower limb revascularisation surgery reduces morbidity and possibly mortality. Until randomised trials with a low risk of bias become available, this study supports use of neuraxial anaesthesia for these procedures where appropriate.

Modern Lower Extremity Bypass Outcomes by Anesthesia Type in the Veteran Population

BACKGROUND

Lower extremity bypass (LEB) revascularization can be performed under general (GA) or neuraxial anesthesia (NA). Studies show that the use of NA may decrease morbidity, 30-day mortality, and hospital length-of-stay (LOS). The goal of our analysis is to examine the differences in postsurgical outcomes following LEB between patients who undergo GA compared to NA in the Veteran Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP) database.

METHODS

After IRB approval, the VASQIP database was assessed for patients who underwent LEB between 1998-2018. Only infrainguinal bypass procedures and anesthesia type classified as "general," "epidural," or "spinal" were included. The neuraxial cohort includes both spinal and epidural anesthesia patients. The Risk Analysis Index (RAI), a validated measure of frailty, was additionally calculated for each patient. Chi squared, paired t-test, and binary logistic regression were used to compare the cohorts.

RESULTS

During this period, 22,960 veterans underwent LEB recorded in VASQIP. Compared to those who underwent surgery under GA, patients with procedures performed using NA were older (66.4 ± 9.6 years vs. 65.3 ± 9 years respectively; P <0.001) and more frail (average RAI score 25.7 ± 7.0 vs. 24.9 ± 6.7; P < 0.001). Operative time was shorter in the NA group (4.1 ± 1.7 hrs vs. 4.7 ± 3.0 hrs; P < 0.001) and fewer cases were emergent (1.55% vs. 4.13%; P <0.001). Patients in the GA group had higher rates of postoperative prolonged ileus (0.31% vs. 0.00%; P = 0.03), pneumonia (1.60% vs. 1.06%; P = 0.025), deep wound infection (2.67% vs. 2.61%; P = 0.01), sepsis (1.68% vs. 0.79%; P < 0.001), reintubation (1.80% vs. 1.30%) (P = 0.04),and number of packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfused intraoperatively (0.39 ± 1.21 units vs. 0.22 ± 0.79 units; P <0.001). There was no significant difference in rate of graft failure, return to the OR, myocardial infarction, death, or LOS. In regression analysis, those undergoing NA were less likely to require pRBC transfusion intraoperatively (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.31-0.61; P < 0.001), however no other outcomes reached statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Although younger and less frail, veteran patients undergoing GA for lower extremity revascularization had higher rates of postoperative ileus, pneumonia, deep wound infection, sepsis, and need for transfusion as compared to those undergoing NA. There was no significant difference in the rate of other major complications, myocardial infarction, death or LOS. After adjustment, only intraoperative transfusion remained statistically significant, likely reflecting longer and more complex cases for those that undergo general anesthesia rather than the effect of anesthetic choice itself.

Anesthesia-based evaluation of outcomes of lower-extremity vascular bypass procedures

BACKGROUND

This report examines the effects of regional versus general anesthesia for infrainguinal bypass procedures performed in the treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI).

METHODS

Nonemergent infrainguinal bypass procedures for CLI (defined as rest pain or tissue loss) were identified using the 2005 to 2008 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database using International Classification of Disease, ninth edition, and Current Procedure Terminology codes. Patients were classified according to National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data as receiving either general anesthesia or regional anesthesia. The regional anesthesia group included those specified as having regional, spinal, or epidural anesthesia. Demographic, medical, risk factor, operative, and outcomes data were abstracted for the study sample. Individual outcomes were evaluated according to the following morbidity categories: wound, pulmonary, venous thromboembolic, genitourinary, cardiovascular, and operative. Length of stay, total morbidity, and mortality were also evaluated. Associations between anesthesia types and outcomes were evaluated using linear or logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 5,462 inpatient hospital visits involving infrainguinal bypasses for CLI were identified. Mean patient age was 69 ± 12 years; 69% were Caucasian; and 39% were female. In all, 4,768 procedures were performed using general anesthesia and 694 with regional anesthesia. Patients receiving general anesthesia were younger and significantly more likely to have a history of smoking, previous lower-extremity bypass, previous amputation, previous stroke, and a history of a bleeding diathesis including the use of warfarin. Patients receiving regional anesthesia had a higher prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Tibial-level bypasses were performed in 51% of procedures, whereas 49% of procedures were popliteal-level bypasses. Cases performed using general anesthesia demonstrated a higher rate of resident involvement, need for blood transfusion, and operative time. There was no difference in the rate of popliteal-level and infrapopliteal-level bypasses between groups. Infrapopliteal bypass procedures performed using general anesthesia were more likely to involve prosthetic grafts and composite vein. Mortality occurred in 157 patients (3%). The overall morbidity rate was 37%. Mean and median lengths of stay were 7.5 days (± 8.1) and 6.0 days (Q1: 4.0, Q3: 8.0), respectively. Multivariate analyses demonstrated no significant differences by anesthesia type in the incidence of morbidity, mortality, or length of stay.

CONCLUSION

These results provide no evidence to support the systematic avoidance of general anesthesia for lower-extremity bypass procedures. These data suggest that anesthetic choice should be governed by local expertise and practice patterns.

Gef��chirurgie im Alter

The prevalence of vascular disease among the elderly population is high (approximately 20%). The morbidity and mortality of many vascular operations show no differences between the fit elderly and younger patients. A major problem is that the elderly are often not diagnosed and treated early enough to prevent emergency operations, which carry a much higher mortality. Many new surgical techniques, especially endovascular interventions, have made vascular surgery less invasive. These advances have increased the potential of life saving and prolonging vascular surgery that can be offered to all patients regardless of age. Risk-benefit analysis, especially in elderly patients, is a cornerstone of proper patient selection. The main goal of vascular surgery in the elderly is preservation of quality of life and independence. Surgery of a ruptured aneurysm is a life saving exception. Indications for treatment in the elderly remains an individual decision making process. Advanced age should not be considered as a limitation or contraindication for carotid, aneurysm and bypass surgery. Age is not a disease, it is just a chapter of life.

Infrapopliteal-lower extremity revascularization with prosthetic conduit: a 20-year experience

The use of prosthetic conduits for lower extremity revascularization in the infrapopliteal location remains controversial. The objective of this report is to describe the immediate and long-term results in a series collected over two decades. Of the approximately 1,500 lower extremity revascularizations performed between 1978 and 1998, 81 infrapopliteal bypass cases using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) as conduit in 77 patients were identified. Autogenous conduit was unavailable (86%) due to prior surgery: coronary artery bypass graft (25%), femoro-popliteal bypass (60%), or femoro-distal bypass (23%). All cases were done for critical ischemia using PTFE (6 mm, 95%; ring reinforced, 54%) under general (75%) or regional (25%) anesthesia. The distal anastomosis was to the anterior tibial artery (43%), posterior tibial artery (28%), tibioperoneal trunk (16%), or peroneal artery (12%), and vein patch was used in 25% of cases. Postoperative features included acute graft thrombosis in 11 cases (14%), all done under general anesthesia, perioperative death in 3 (4%), and a mean in-hospital stay of 17 days. Long-term follow-up has ranged from 1 to 144 months (mean, 22 months). At 36 months, primary patency was 20%, secondary patency 42%, and limb salvage 55% calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate analyses revealed regional anesthesia was associated with prolonged primary patency (35% vs 15%, p=0.026) while the use of ring-reinforced PTFE conduit was associated with prolonged limb salvage (65% vs 40%, p=0.042). All other variables including gender, smoking, diabetes mellitus, renal failure, decade of operation, use of vein patch or postoperative warfarin were not significantly associated with either prolonged patency or limb salvage. Despite poor primary patency, distal prosthetic bypass can lead to long-term limb salvage. These data suggest distal anastomotic vein patches and postoperative anticoagulation may not be beneficial adjuncts. However, the use of regional anesthesia may decrease the incidence of perioperative thrombosis and the use of ring reinforced conduit may prolong limb salvage.

Intraoperative management: peripheral vascular surgery

Lower extremity atherosclerotic disease affects nearly 10 million people in the United States. Recent advances in diagnostic imaging and interventional techniques help many patients avoid more invasive surgical procedures. Those reaching the operating room, however,represent a distilled subset of patients who are prone to significant comorbidities. We outline current treatment strategies and discuss anesthetic concerns and techniques for these complex patients.

Preoperative assessment and management to prevent complications during high-risk vascular surgery

OBJECTIVE

Most patients requiring vascular surgical reconstruction are at high risk for major morbidity and mortality, with certain vascular procedures at particularly high risk for complications. Although numerous comorbid conditions are precisely the risk factors that determine outcome, we review particular factors for each surgery that may be optimized to alter outcome and minimize postoperative complications.

DESIGN

Literature review.

RESULTS

Certain aspects of care are common to all vascular surgery procedures, including thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair, pararenal and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, mesenteric and renal revascularization, and carotid endarterectomy. Some factors that are important include careful preoperative assessment and optimization of cardiac, pulmonary, and renal function and volume status. In addition, the use of experienced teams during and after the procedure, as well as clear and continuous communication between all surgical team members, may improve outcome. Particular attention to procedural details is also crucial to achieving excellent results.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients needing vascular surgery often possess management challenges that increase the risk of perioperative complications. Meticulous attention to details during all phases of care, including preoperative optimization as well as intraoperative procedural conduct and communication, helps achieve optimal results and thus minimize the risk of complications.