Neuraxial blocks and spinal haematoma: Review of 166 cases published 1994 – 2015. Part 2: diagnosis, treatment, and outcome

Background

Bleeding into the vertebral canal causing a spinal haematoma (SH) is a rare but serious complication to central neuraxial blocks (CNB). Of all serious complications to CNBs, neurological injury associated with SH has the worst prognosis. Around the turn of the millennium, the first guidelines aiming to reduce the risk of this complication were published. These guidelines are based on known risk factors for SH, rather than evidence from randomized, controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs, and hence meta-analysis of RCTs, are not appropriate for identifying rare events. Analysing data from a significant number of published case reports of rare complications may reveal risk factors and patterns undetectable in reports on occasional cases, and can thereby help to improve management of CNBs. The aims of the present review were to analyse case reports of SH after CNBs published between 1994 and 2015 with regard to diagnosis, treatment, and outcome of SH after CNB.

Methods

MEDLINE and EMBASE were utilized to find case reports published in English, German, or Scandinavian languages between 1994 and end of 2015, using appropriate search terms. Reference lists were also scrutinized for case reports. We documented initial and worst symptoms and signs of SH, diagnostic methods, treatment, and outcome of the SH. We calculated occurrences in per cent using the number of informative reports as denominator.

Results

One hundred and sixty-six case reports on spinal hematomas after CNB published during the years between 1994 and 2015 were identified. Eighty per cent of the patients had severe neurological symptoms (paresis or paralysis). When compared over time, outcomes have improved significantly. Among patients subjected to surgical evacuation of the hematoma, outcomes were best if surgery was performed within 12 hours from the firstsign of motor dysfunction. However, even patients operated after more than 24 hours had relatively favourable outcomes. Whereas the outcomes after surgical evacuation of the epidural haematomas were quite satisfactory, only one of the operations for subdural haematoma (SSDH) resulted in a favourable outcome.

Conclusions and implications

Suspicion of a spinal hematoma calls for the consultation of an orthopaedic or neurological surgeon without delay. MRI is the recommended diagnostic tool. Surgical evacuation within 12 h from the first sign of motor dysfunction seems to lead to the best outcome, although many patients operated as late as after more than 24 hours did regain full motor function. Despite the poor prognosis after surgical evacuation of SSDH, the outcomes after post-CNB spinal haematoma in general have improved significantly over time.

Epidural Hematoma and Abscess Related to Thoracic Epidural Analgesia: A Single-Center Study of 2,907 Patients Who Underwent Lung Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To report the major complications (epidural hematoma and abscess) of postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia in patients who underwent lung surgery.

DESIGN

Prospective, monocentric study.

SETTING

A university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

All lung surgical patients who received postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia between November 2007 and November 2015.

INTERVENTIONS

Thoracic epidural analgesia for patients who underwent lung surgery.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

During the study period, data for 2,907 patients were recorded. The following 3 major complications were encountered: 1 case of epidural hematoma (0.34 case/1,000; 95% confidence interval 0.061-1.946), for which surgery was performed, and 2 cases of epidural abscesses (0.68 case/1,000; 95% confidence interval 0.189-2.505), which were treated medically.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk range of serious complications was moderate; only the patient who experienced an epidural hematoma also experienced permanent sequelae.

[Regional analgesia--risks and benefits]

BACKGROUND

Local anaesthetics may alleviate pain more effectively than any other anaesthetic method. In regional anaesthesia/analgesia, rare but serious complications make it necessary to always consider the risk-benefit ratio. The article discusses these issues and gives advice on effective and safe conduct.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The article is based on non-systematic literature searches in the PubMed and Cochrane databases and our own experience from research and clinical work.

RESULTS

Regional anaesthesia is obtained by administering local anaesthetics near the spinal cord and nerve roots (spinal, epidural), spinal nerves (paravertebral), or close to peripheral nerves. Parts of the body will then become numb and paralysed. The same techniques are used for regional analgesia, but this is obtained by using more dilute solutions of local anaesthetics, and other analgesic drugs are often added. Pain impulses are inhibited, but sensation of touch and muscle functions are intact. Regional analgesia gives superior relief of pain provoked by movement. This facilitates early postoperative mobilization of patients, even after major surgery in weak patients. For these patients optimally performed regional analgesia may reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality better than general anaesthesia and opioid and non-opioid analgesics administered postoperatively. Infiltration of the wound with local anaesthetics followed by optimally dosed non-opioid and opioid analgesics is a good alternative for some types of surgery. The risk of spinal bleeding has increased due to increased patient age, routine thromboprophylaxis and frequent use of antihaemostatic drugs, including platelet inhibitors. Infections in the spinal cord are caused by insufficient hygiene. Selection of patients who are likely to benefit from regional anaesthesia/analgesia, strict hygienic precautions, optimal technique, close monitoring, and assistance from an acute pain team, as well as hospital protocols for handling rare but serious complications, have reduced the occurrence and consequences of serious complications.

INTERPRETATION

Optimal regional anaesthesia/analgesia may improve the postoperative result.

Nordic guidelines for neuraxial blocks in disturbed haemostasis from the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine

BACKGROUND

Central neuraxial blocks (CNBs) for surgery and analgesia are an important part of anaesthesia practice in the Nordic countries. More active thromboprophylaxis with potent antihaemostatic drugs has increased the risk of bleeding into the spinal canal. National guidelines for minimizing this risk in patients who benefit from such blocks vary in their recommendations for safe practice.

METHODS

The Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SSAI) appointed a task force of experts to establish a Nordic consensus on recommendations for best clinical practice in providing effective and safe CNBs in patients with an increased risk of bleeding. We performed a literature search and expert evaluation of evidence for (1) the possible benefits of CNBs on the outcome of anaesthesia and surgery, for (2) risks of spinal bleeding from hereditary and acquired bleeding disorders and antihaemostatic drugs used in surgical patients for thromboprophylaxis, for (3) risk evaluation in published case reports, and for (4) recommendations in published national guidelines. Proposals from the taskforce were available for feedback on the SSAI web-page during the summer of 2008.

RESULTS

Neuraxial blocks can improve comfort and reduce morbidity (strong evidence) and mortality (moderate evidence) after surgical procedures. Haemostatic disorders, antihaemostatic drugs, anatomical abnormalities of the spine and spinal blood vessels, elderly patients, and renal and hepatic impairment are risk factors for spinal bleeding (strong evidence). Published national guidelines are mainly based on experts' opinions (weak evidence). The task force reached a consensus on Nordic guidelines, mainly based on our experts' opinions, but we acknowledge different practices in heparinization during vascular surgery and peri-operative administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs during neuraxial blocks.

CONCLUSIONS

Experts from the five Nordic countries offer consensus recommendations for safe clinical practice of neuraxial blocks and how to minimize the risks of serious complications from spinal bleeding. A brief version of the recommendations is available on http://www.ssai.info.