Laparoscopic adnexectomy under regional anaesthesia: It is possible!

At present, the majority of laparoscopic operations are performed under general anaesthesia, as it controls surgical pain and improves patient comfort using pneumoperitoneum and the Trendelenburg position. However, some laparoscopic procedures, such as adnexectomies, can potentially be performed under epidural anaesthesia with a purposefully selected and motivated patient managed by prepared surgical and anaesthesia care teams working together effectively. This study reports the case of a 63-year-old female patient with major respiratory failure who underwent laparoscopic bilateral adnexectomies under epidural anaesthesia.

Laparoscopically assisted suprapubic surgery for adnexal tumors under epidural anesthesia

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopically assisted surgery for benign ovarian tumors via a single suprapubic incision under epidural anesthesia.

METHODS

Forty-three patients underwent laparoscopically assisted surgery via a single suprapubic incision under epidural anesthesia. Types of surgery were classified as follows: type I - suprapubic incision surgery without laparoscopic support, type II - suprapubic incision surgery with laparoscopic support but without CO₂ inflation; and type III - suprapubic incision surgery with laparoscopic support and CO₂ inflation.

RESULTS

Type I, II, and III procedures were performed on 16, 21, and six patients, respectively. Most patients (n = 35) were discharged on postoperative day 1 or 2. No surgical complication was encountered. Types of surgery exhibited different surgical characteristics. Type I was adopted for larger diameter tumors than types II or III (p = .016), whereas type III had a longer operative time (p = .024) than types I and II. Other characteristics, such as age, body mass index, and length of hospital stay, did not differ significantly among surgical types.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopically assisted surgery for adnexal tumors via a single suprapubic incision under epidural anesthesia is feasible and safe, and should be viewed as an alternative approach to conventional minimally invasive surgery.

Comparison of Postoperative Events between Spinal Anesthesia and General Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is usually carried out under general anesthesia. There were a few studies which have found spinal anesthesia as a safe alternative. We aimed to evaluate the postoperative events between spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (from inception to January 2016) for eligible studies. The primary outcome was the visual analogue scale score. Secondary outcomes included postoperative nausea and vomiting and urine retention 24 hours postoperatively. We calculated pooled risk ratios and 95% confidence interval using random- or fixed-effects models. Results. Eight trials involving 723 patients were listed. Meta-analysis showed that patients in spinal anesthesia groups have lower visual analogue scale score 24 hours postoperatively. There were significant decreases in the occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in spinal anesthesia group when compared with general anesthesia group (odds ratios: 0.38, 95% confidence interval: 0.19-0.76; P = 0.006) with heterogeneity accepted (I (2) = 13%; P = 0.33), while urine retention rate was increased in patients with spinal anesthesia (odds ratios: 4.95, 95% confidence interval: 1.24-19.71; P = 0.02) without any heterogeneity (I (2) = 0%; P = 0.98). Conclusions. Spinal anesthesia may be associated with less postoperative pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with general anesthesia.

General versus epidural anesthesia for lumbar microdiscectomy

This study was a retrospective analysis of 850 lumbar microdiscectomy (LMD) under epidural anesthesia (EA; n=573) or general anesthesia (GA; n=277) performed by the same surgeon and paid by invoice to the Social Security Institution of the Turkish Republic between April 2003 and May 2013. Although GA is the most frequently used method of anesthesia during LMD, the choice of regional anesthetia (epidural, spinal or a combination of these) differs between surgeons and anesthetists. Studies have reported that EA in surgery for lumbar disc herniation may be more reliable than GA, as it enables the surgeon to communicate with the patient during surgery, but few studies have compared the costs of these two anesthetic methods in LMD. We found that EA patient costs were significantly lower than GA patient costs (p<0.01) and there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of the time spent in the operating room (p<0.01). There was no difference in the duration of surgery (p>0.05). The anesthetic method used during LMD affected the complication rate, cost and efficiency of operating room use. We suggest that EA is an anesthetic method that can contribute to health care cost savings and enable LMD to be completed with less nerve root manipulation and more comfort, efficacy, reliability and cost efficiency without affecting the success rate of the surgical procedure.

Laparo-endoscopic single-site (LESS) cholecystectomy with epidural vs. general anesthesia

BACKGROUND

Laparo-endoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery involves a single umbilical incision, lending itself to epidural anesthesia. This prospective, randomized study was undertaken to evaluate epidural anesthesia for patients undergoing LESS cholecystectomy, to assess the feasibility, and to analyze all intraoperative and postoperative complications. The secondary objectives were to determine differences in postoperative pain and time until PACU discharge-to-home readiness between patients.

METHODS

With institutional review board approval, 20 patients with chronic cholecystitis, cholelithiasis, and/or biliary dyskinesia were randomized to receive spinal epidural anesthesia (n = 10) or general anesthesia (n = 10). Postoperative pain at rest was recorded in the PACU every 10 min, and at rest and walking at discharge using the visual analog scale (VAS). Operative time and time until PACU discharge-to-home readiness were recorded. Results are expressed as mean ± SD.

RESULTS

Patient age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and body mass index were similar. There were no additional ports/incisions, conversions to "open" operations, or conversions to general anesthesia. There were no differences in operative duration. Time until postanesthesia care unit discharge-to-home ready was not significantly different. The most common postoperative adverse event was urinary retention (1 epidural and 3 general anesthesia patients). Resting postoperative VAS pain score at discharge was 4.7 ± 2.5 vs. 2.2 ± 1.6 (p = 0.02, general versus epidural anesthesia respectively); the stressed VAS pain score at discharge was 6.1 ± 2.3 vs. 3.1 ± 2.8 (p = 0.02, general versus epidural anesthesia respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

LESS cholecystectomy with epidural anesthesia was completed with no operative or anesthetic conversions, and less postoperative pain at discharge. Epidural anesthesia appears to be a preferable alternative to general anesthesia for patients undergoing LESS cholecystectomy.