A prospective randomized study of intraoperative thoracic epidural analgesia in off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery

Thoracic Epidural Anesthesia in Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Research on fast-track recovery protocols postulates that thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) in cardiac surgery contributes to improved postoperative outcomes. However, concerns about TEA's safety hinder its widespread usage. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the benefits and risks of TEA in cardiac surgery.

METHODS

We searched 4 databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the use of TEA against only general anesthesia (GA) in adults undergoing cardiac surgery, up till June 4, 2022. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses, evaluated risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool, and rated certainty of evidence via the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Primary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU), hospital length of stay, extubation time (ET), and mortality. Other outcomes included postoperative complications. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was conducted on all outcomes to elicit statistical and clinical benefit.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included 51 RCTs (2112 TEA patients and 2220 GA patients). TEA significantly reduced ICU length of stay (-6.9 hours; 95% confidence interval [CI], -12.5 to -1.2; P = .018), hospital length of stay (-0.8 days; 95% CI, -1.1 to -0.4; P < .0001), and ET (-2.9 hours; 95% CI, -3.7 to -2.0; P < .0001). However, we found no significant change in mortality. TSA found that the cumulative Z-curve passed the TSA-adjusted boundary for ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, and ET, suggesting a clinical benefit. TEA also significantly reduced pain scores, pooled pulmonary complications, transfusion requirements, delirium, and arrhythmia, without additional complications such as epidural hematomas, of which the risk was estimated to be <0.14%.

CONCLUSIONS

TEA reduces ICU and hospital length of stay, and postoperative complications in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with minimal reported complications such as epidural hematomas. These findings favor the use of TEA in cardiac surgery and warrant consideration for use in cardiac surgeries worldwide.

Epidural analgesia for adults undergoing cardiac surgery with or without cardiopulmonary bypass

BACKGROUND

General anaesthesia combined with epidural analgesia may have a beneficial effect on clinical outcomes. However, use of epidural analgesia for cardiac surgery is controversial due to a theoretical increased risk of epidural haematoma associated with systemic heparinization. This review was published in 2013, and it was updated in 2019.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of perioperative epidural analgesia in adults undergoing cardiac surgery, with or without cardiopulmonary bypass, on perioperative mortality and cardiac, pulmonary, or neurological morbidity.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in November 2018, and two trial registers up to February 2019, together with references and relevant conference abstracts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including adults undergoing any type of cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia and comparing epidural analgesia versus another modality of postoperative pain treatment. The primary outcome was mortality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 69 trials with 4860 participants: 2404 given epidural analgesia and 2456 receiving comparators (systemic analgesia, peripheral nerve block, intrapleural analgesia, or wound infiltration). The mean (or median) age of participants varied between 43.5 years and 74.6 years. Surgeries performed were coronary artery bypass grafting or valvular procedures and surgeries for congenital heart disease. We judged that no trials were at low risk of bias for all domains, and that all trials were at unclear/high risk of bias for blinding of participants and personnel taking care of study participants.Epidural analgesia versus systemic analgesiaTrials show there may be no difference in mortality at 0 to 30 days (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.01 to 0.01; 38 trials with 3418 participants; low-quality evidence), and there may be a reduction in myocardial infarction at 0 to 30 days (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.00; 26 trials with 2713 participants; low-quality evidence). Epidural analgesia may reduce the risk of 0 to 30 days respiratory depression (RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to -0.01; 21 trials with 1736 participants; low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference in risk of pneumonia at 0 to 30 days (RD -0.03, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.01; 10 trials with 1107 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and epidural analgesia probably reduces the risk of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter at 0 to 2 weeks (RD -0.06, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.01; 18 trials with 2431 participants; moderate-quality evidence). There may be no difference in cerebrovascular accidents at 0 to 30 days (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; 18 trials with 2232 participants; very low-quality evidence), and none of the included trials reported any epidural haematoma events at 0 to 30 days (53 trials with 3982 participants; low-quality evidence). Epidural analgesia probably reduces the duration of tracheal intubation by the equivalent of 2.4 hours (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.78, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.55; 40 trials with 3353 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Epidural analgesia reduces pain at rest and on movement up to 72 hours after surgery. At six to eight hours, researchers noted a reduction in pain, equivalent to a reduction of 1 point on a 0 to 10 pain scale (SMD -1.35, 95% CI -1.98 to -0.72; 10 trials with 502 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Epidural analgesia may increase risk of hypotension (RD 0.21, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.33; 17 trials with 870 participants; low-quality evidence) but may make little or no difference in the need for infusion of inotropics or vasopressors (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.07; 23 trials with 1821 participants; low-quality evidence).Epidural analgesia versus other comparatorsFewer studies compared epidural analgesia versus peripheral nerve blocks (four studies), intrapleural analgesia (one study), and wound infiltration (one study). Investigators provided no data for pulmonary complications, atrial fibrillation or flutter, or for any of the comparisons. When reported, other outcomes for these comparisons (mortality, myocardial infarction, neurological complications, duration of tracheal intubation, pain, and haemodynamic support) were uncertain due to the small numbers of trials and participants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with systemic analgesia, epidural analgesia may reduce the risk of myocardial infarction, respiratory depression, and atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter, as well as the duration of tracheal intubation and pain, in adults undergoing cardiac surgery. There may be little or no difference in mortality, pneumonia, and epidural haematoma, and effects on cerebrovascular accident are uncertain. Evidence is insufficient to show the effects of epidural analgesia compared with peripheral nerve blocks, intrapleural analgesia, or wound infiltration.

A comparison of the analgesia efficacy and side effects of paravertebral compared with epidural blockade for thoracotomy: an updated meta-analysis

Objective

The most recent systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the analgesic efficacy and side effects of paravertebral and epidural blockade for thoracotomy was published in 2006. Nine well-designed randomized trials with controversial results have been published since then. The present report constitutes an updated meta-analysis of this issue.

Summary of Background

Thoracotomy is a major surgical procedure and is associated with severe postoperative pain. Epidural analgesia is the gold standard for post-thoracotomy pain management, but has its limitations and contraindications, and paravertebral blockade is increasingly popular. However, it has not been decided whether the analgesic effect of the two methods is comparable, or whether paravertebral blockade leads to a lower incidence of adverse side effects after thoracotomy.

Methods

Two reviewers independently searched the databases PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (last performed on 1 February, 2013) for reports of studies comparing post-thoracotomy epidural analgesia and paravertebral blockade. The same individuals independently extracted data from the appropriate studies.

Result

Eighteen trials involving 777 patients were included in the current analysis. There was no significant difference in pain scores between paravertebral blockade and epidural analgesia at 4–8, 24, 48 hours, and the rates of pulmonary complications and morphine usage during the first 24 hours were also similar. However, paravertebral blockade was better than epidural analgesia in reducing the incidence of urinary retention (p<0.0001), nausea and vomiting (p = 0.01), hypotension (p<0.00001), and rates of failed block were lower in the paravertebral blockade group (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis showed that PVB can provide comparable pain relief to traditional EPI, and may have a better side-effect profile for pain relief after thoracic surgery. Further high-powered randomized trials are to need to determine whether PVB truly offers any advantages over EPI.

Epidural analgesia for cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

A combination of general anaesthesia (GA) with thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) may have a beneficial effect on clinical outcomes by reducing the risk of perioperative complications after cardiac surgery.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to determine the impact of perioperative epidural analgesia in cardiac surgery on perioperative mortality and cardiac, pulmonary or neurological morbidity. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the risk of adverse events and mortality in patients undergoing cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia with and without epidural analgesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2012, Issue 12) in The Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (PubMed) (1966 to November 2012); EMBASE (1989 to November 2012); CINHAL (1982 to November 2012) and the Science Citation Index (1988 to November 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery with either GA alone or GA in combination with TEA.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All publications found during the search were manually and independently reviewed by the two authors. We identified 5035 titles, of which 4990 studies did not satisfy the selection criteria or were duplicate publications, that were retrieved from the five different databases. We performed a full review on 45 studies, of which 31 publications met all inclusion criteria. These 31 publications reported on a total of 3047 patients, 1578 patients with GA and 1469 patients with GA plus TEA.

MAIN RESULTS

Through our search (November 2012) we have identified 5035 titles, of which 31 publications met our inclusion criteria and reported on a total of 3047 patients. Compared with GA alone, the pooled risk ratio (RR) for patients receiving GA with TEA showed an odds ratio (OR) of 0.84 (95% CI 0.33 to 2.13, 31 studies) for mortality; 0.76 (95% CI 0.49 to 1.19, 17 studies) for myocardial infarction; and 0.50 (95% CI 0.21 to 1.18, 10 studies) for stroke. The relative risks (RR) for respiratory complications and supraventricular arrhythmias were 0.68 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.86, 14 studies) and 0.65 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.86, 15 studies) respectively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of studies, identified to 2010, showed that the use of TEA in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery may reduce the risk of postoperative supraventricular arrhythmias and respiratory complications. There were no effects of TEA with GA on the risk of mortality, myocardial infarction or neurological complications compared with GA alone.