Saddle block anesthetic technique for benign outpatient anorectal surgery

Belgian consensus guideline on the management of anal fissures

Introduction

Acute and chronic anal fissures are common proctological problems that lead to relatively high morbidity and frequent contacts with health care professionals. Multiple treatment options, both topical and surgical, are available, therefore evidence-based guidance is preferred.

Methods

A Delphi consensus process was used to review the literature and create relevant statements on the treatment of anal fissures. These statements were discussed and modulated until sufficient agreement was reached. These guidelines were based on the published literature up to January 2023.

Results

Anal fissures occur equally in both sexes, mostly between the second and fourth decades of life. Diagnosis can be made based on cardinal symptoms and clinical examination. In case of insufficient relief with conservative treatment options, pharmacological sphincter relaxation is preferred. After 6-8 weeks of topical treatment, surgical options can be explored. Both lateral internal sphincterotomy as well as fissurectomy are well-established surgical techniques, both with specific benefits and risks.

Conclusions

The current guidelines for the management of anal fissures include recommendations for the clinical evaluation of anal fissures, and their conservative, topical and surgical management.

General anesthesia with local infiltration reduces urine retention rate and prolongs analgesic effect than spinal anesthesia for hemorrhoidectomy

Introduction

Postoperative pain and complications pose significant challenges following a hemorrhoidectomy. Attaining effective anesthesia with minimal complications is crucial. The ideal anesthesia method for ambulatory hemorrhoidectomy remains uncertain. This study aimed to investigate whether the combination of general anesthesia plus local infiltration (GAL) is associated with lower complications and reduced pain compared to spinal anesthesia (SA) in the context of hemorrhoidectomy.

Methods

This retrospective single-center cohort study, conducted in a tertiary medical center in East Asia, evaluated excisional hemorrhoidectomies performed between January 1, 2017, and March 31, 2023, utilizing GAL or SA. Data on the six most common complications-pain, constipation, acute urine retention (AUR), bleeding, nausea, and headache-were extracted from medical records. A total of 550 hemorrhoidectomies were included: 220 in the GAL group and 330 in the SA group. Patient characteristics were comparable between the two groups.

Results

The AUR rate was significantly lower in the GAL group compared to the SA group (15.5% vs. 32.1%, P < 0.001). Although the proportion of pain scores ≥4 did not differ significantly between the GAL and SA groups (36.2% vs. 39.8%, P = 0.429), the pain score curve indicated a stable trend. Overall, the GAL group exhibited a lower rate of adverse effects (56.9% vs. 67.4%, P = 0.023). There were no significant differences in the rates of other complications and emergency department readmission between the GAL and SA groups.

Discussion

GAL emerges as a favorable choice for anesthesia in hemorrhoidectomy, demonstrating a lower incidence of urine retention and a prolonged analgesic effect in multiple hemorrhoidectomies. These findings support the conclusion that GAL represents an optimal anesthetic method for enhancing the postoperative experience in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy.

Comparison of Different Local Anesthetic Volumes for Saddle Block Anesthesia in Ambulatory Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Trial

INTRODUCTION

Saddle block anesthesia (SBA) is a frequently preferred method for ambulatory anorectal surgery. This study aimed to observe the effects of two different dose SBAs on discharge times and perioperative block characteristics in patients undergoing ambulatory anorectal surgery.

METHODS

The study was conducted as a prospective, randomized controlled study. Patients over the age of 18 who were scheduled for ambulatory anorectal surgery and had American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II were included in the research. Patients were divided into two groups: 5 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% (Group I; n=34) and 3 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% (Group II; n=34). The primary outcome was discharge time. Characteristics of the spinal block like time to reach S4 blockade, maximum blocked dermatome, regression time of sensorial, first analgesic need time, voiding time, mobilization time, and side effects were the secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients were included in the study. The groups were similar in terms of demographic and surgical characteristics (p > 0.05). In Group II, S4 sensory dermatome blockade time was statistically longer (p: 0.007) and the time to the disappearance of the sensory block was statistically shorter (p < 0.001). Also, voiding time and discharge times were statistically shorter in Group II (p: 0.049, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

SBA provided adequate anesthesia, and the complication rates were limited. Saddle block can be considered an advantageous technique because of conditions that adversely affect recoveries, such as postoperative cognitive problems, nausea, and vomiting due to general anesthesia. In addition, better recovery results and optimal surgical condition with 3 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine in our study suggest that this dose may be a good alternative.