Comparing perioperative outcomes between regional anesthesia and general anesthesia in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Nearly all patients with hip fractures undergo surgical treatment. The use of different anesthesia techniques during surgery may influence the clinical outcomes. The optimal anesthetic technique for patients undergoing hip fracture surgery is still controversial. We performed this updated systematic review and meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing hip fracture surgery with different anesthesia techniques.

SOURCE

Articles published from 2000 to May 2023 were included from MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing general anesthesia (GA) with regional anesthesia (RA) for the outcomes of 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, perioperative complications, length of hospital stay, and length of surgery in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Subgroup analyses were performed for the outcomes based on study design (randomized controlled trials or observational studies). We used a random-effects model for all analyses.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In this meta-analysis, we included 12 randomized controlled trials. There was no difference in postoperative 30-day mortality between the two groups (odds ratio [OR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44 to 1.74; I2 = 0%). The incidence of intraoperative hypotension was lower in patients who received RA vs GA (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.72; I2 = 0%). No significant differences were observed in 90-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, postoperative delirium, pneumonia, myocardial infarction, venous thromboembolism, length of surgery, and length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

In this updated systematic review and meta-analysis, RA did not reduce postoperative 30-day mortality in hip fracture surgery patients compared to GA. Fewer patients receiving RA had intraoperative hypotension than those receiving GA did. Apart from intraoperative hypotension, the data showed no differences in complications between the two anesthetic techniques.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42023411854); registered 7 April 2023.

Is water vapor thermal therapy safe and feasible in elderly and frail men? The Italian experience

PURPOSE

In recent years, water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) has spread as minimally invasive technique in lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia treatment. Even if its safety and feasibility have been largely proved in young men, nobody has proved the same feasibility and safety in the elderly (men older than 75 years old). Our aim is to compare WVTT safety outcomes in men older than 75 with younger men.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on men who underwent water vapor thermal therapy from 2019. We compared data on operative time, number of injections, intra-operative and post-operative complications, reinterventions rate.

RESULTS

We enrolled 426 patients; among these, 60 were older than 75 years old, 366 were younger. Our cohorts of patients had similar results in terms of intra-operative and post-operative complications. Operative time accounts about 11 min for both groups (p = 0.535), total number of injections was seven for young men and eight for elderly (p = 0.314). We found no intra-operative complications in elderly men group and only one in the younger group (p = 0.678), while five younger men underwent clot retention, and two elderly men experienced this complication (p = 0.239). Only one transfusion occurred in the elderly group. No differences between groups occurred in terms of length of stay, post-operative urinary retention and reintervention rate, while catheterization time was longer in the elderly men.

CONCLUSION

WVTT is a safe procedure in elderly patients with comparable intra-operative and post-operative complication rate in comparison with younger patients.

Assessing the Precision of Surgery Duration Estimation: A Retrospective Study

Background and Objectives

The operating room (OR) is considered the highest source of cost and earnings. Therefore, measuring OR efficiency, which means how time and resources are allocated precisely for their intended purposes in the operating room is crucial. Both overestimation and underestimation negatively impact OR efficiency Therefore, hospitals defined metrics to Measuring OR Effeciency. Many studies have discussed OR efficiency and how surgery scheduling accuracy plays a vital role in increasing OR efficiency. This study aims to evaluate OR efficiency using surgery duration accuracy.

Methods

This retrospective, quantitative study was conducted at King Abdulaziz Medical City. We extracted data on 97,397 surgeries from 2017 to 2021 from the OR database. The accuracy of surgery duration was identified by calculating the duration of each surgery in minutes by subtracting the time of leaving the OR from the time of entering the OR. Based on the scheduled duration, the calculated durations were categorized as either underestimation or overestimation. Descriptive and bivariate analyses (Chi-square test) were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software.

Results

Sixty percent out of the 97,397 surgeries performed were overestimated compared to the time scheduled by the surgeons. Patient characteristics, surgical division, and anesthesia type showed statistically significant differences (p <0.05) in their OR estimation.

Conclusion

Significant proportion of procedures have overestimated. This finding provides insight into the need for improvement.

Recommendations

It is recommended to enhance the surgical scheduling method using machine learning (ML) models to include patient characteristics, department, anesthesia type, and even the performing surgeon increases the accuracy of duration estimation. Then, evaluate the performance of an ML model in future studies.

Effect of spinal versus general anesthesia on thirty-day outcomes following total hip arthroplasty: A matched-pair cohort analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

It has not yet been established whether total hip arthroplasty complications are associated with anesthetic technique (spinal versus general). This study assessed the effect of spinal versus general anesthesia on health care resource utilization and secondary endpoints following total hip arthroplasty.

DESIGN

Propensity-matched cohort analysis.

SETTING

American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participating hospitals from 2015 to 2021.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty (n = 223,060).

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS

The a priori study duration was 2015 to 2018 (n = 109,830). The primary endpoint was 30-day unplanned resource utilization, namely readmission and reoperation. Secondary endpoints included 30-day wound complications, systemic complications, bleeding events, and mortality. The impact of anesthetic technique was investigated with univariate analyses, multivariable analyses, and survival analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

The 1:1 propensity-matched cohort included 96,880 total patients (48,440 in each anesthesia group) from 2015 to 2018. On univariate analysis, spinal anesthesia was associated with a lower incidence of unplanned resource utilization (3.1% [1486/48440] vs 3.7% [1770/48440]; odds ratio [OR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.90]; P < .001), systemic complications (1.1% [520/48440] vs 1.5% [723/48440]; OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.80]; P < .001), and bleeding events requiring transfusion (2.3% [1120/48440] vs 4.9% [2390/48440]; OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.49]; P < .001). On multivariable analysis, spinal anesthesia remained an independent predictor of unplanned resource utilization (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.90]; c = 0.646), systemic complications (AOR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.81]; c = 0.676), and bleeding events (AOR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.49]; c = 0.686). Hospital length of stay was also shorter in the spinal anesthesia cohort (2.15 vs 2.24 days; mean difference, -0.09 [95% CI, -0.12 to -0.07]; P < .001). Similar findings were observed in the cohort from 2019 to 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

Total hip arthroplasty patients receiving spinal anesthesia experience favorable outcomes compared to propensity-matched general anesthesia patients.

Is Femoral Nerve Block Superior to Fascia Iliac Block in Hip Surgery? Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background. Femoral nerve block (FNB) and fascia iliac compartment block (FICB) are alternative methods of pain relief during hip surgery. Nevertheless, the effectiveness and safety of FNB compared with FICB are yet to be fully determined. Methods. Electronic databases were systematically searched. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on hip surgery were included. Postoperatively, the pain scores at different time points, narcotic requirements in 24 h, mean arterial pressure, spinal anesthesia (SA) time, patient satisfaction, and adverse effect rates between the two groups were extracted throughout the study. Results. Fourteen RCTs including 1179 patients were included. Compared to the FICB, FNB decreased the VAS scores postoperatively at 24 h at rest ( $P<0.05$ ) and the incidence rate of some side effects (nausea, vomiting, and sedation) ( $P<0.05$ ). However, compared to the FICB, no significant difference was found in the FNB regarding the VAS scores postoperatively at any of the other time points (2 min, 20 min, 2 h, 24 h at movement, 48 h at rest, and 48 h at movement). Patients in both groups had similar narcotic needs after 24 h, mean arterial pressure, SA time, and patient satisfaction ( $P>0.05$ ). Conclusions. FNB has more advantages in reducing VAS scores postoperatively at 24 h at rest and the odds of some adverse effects. A better quality RCT is needed to properly compare FNB with FICB.

Comparison of Effects between Combined Lumbar-Sacral Plexus Block plus General Anesthesia and Unilateral Spinal Anesthesia in Elderly Patients Undergoing Hip Fracture Surgery: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Hip fracture is a common injury in geriatric populations, which is associated with poor quality of life. However, the ideal anesthesia technique for this disease is yet to be identified. This study aimed to compare the combined lumbar-sacral plexus block (CLSB) plus general anesthesia (bispectral index (BIS) 60–80) with the unilateral spinal anesthesia (SA) on activity of daily living in elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery.

Methods

A total of 124 elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery were randomly assigned to two groups. Patients in the SA group received light-specific gravity spinal anesthesia, and patients in the CLSB group received lumbar and sacral plexus block with general anesthesia (BIS 60–80). The primary outcomes were 30-day activity of daily living (ADL). The secondary outcomes were postoperative pain scores, postoperative delirium, in-hospital cost, and major complications.

Results

The ADL scores of postoperative day 30 (POD30) in the CLSB group are higher than those in the SA group (27.34 ± 7.01 versus 24.70 ± 6.40, P=0.045). Compared to preoperative ADL scores, there were higher increased scores in the CLSB group than in POD30 (CLSB group 8.09 ± 3.39 versus SA group 4.87 ± 3.90, P < 0.001). Mild-to-moderate pain did not have differences between the two groups (rest pain: 3 versus 2, P=0.344; motion pain: 5 versus 4, P=0.073). There were no significant differences in incidence of postoperative delirium, PONV, and other complications.

Conclusion

The unilateral SA can reduce the deterioration of ADL after hip fracture surgery and provide a better postoperative recovery.

Scoping review of mode of anaesthesia in emergency surgery

BACKGROUND

Emergency surgery encompasses more than 50 per cent of the surgical workload; however, research efforts are disproportionally low. The mode of anaesthesia used during emergency surgery may affect outcomes, but the extent of research and the impact of the different modes of anaesthesia used are unclear.

METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase were searched using scoping review methodology with a rapid systematic search strategy, identifying any study comparing locoregional (local, nerve block, subarachnoid, epidural) anaesthesia with general anaesthesia. All studies describing outcomes of emergency surgery with differing modes of anaesthesia were identified. Excluded were: studies published before 2003, studies enrolling patients aged less than 18 years and studies using sedation only.

RESULTS

Forty-two studies were identified, describing 11 surgical procedures. Most publications were retrospective cohort studies (32). A very broad range of clinical and patient-reported outcomes were described, with wide variation in the outcomes reported in different studies.

CONCLUSION

Reporting of mode of anaesthesia is inconsistent across different procedures and is often absent. There is a need for directed research efforts to improve the reporting standards of anaesthesia interventions, to understand the role of different modes of anaesthesia in specific emergency surgical procedures, and to standardize outcome reporting using core outcome sets.

Perioperative care of geriatric patients

The older population is expected to nearly double across the globe by 2050, and the baby boom cohort is expected to represent at least 20% of the US population by 2030. Geriatric patients will increasingly utilize the health-care system, and therefore surgical and perioperative care must be tailored to this sensitive group given the increased risk for perioperative complications. The literature was reviewed to highlight fundamental components of the preoperative evaluation as well as cardiac, pulmonary, and renal complications. Frailty is a multidimensional process that can lead to the physiologic effects of aging and estimates the risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality better than chronologic age alone. Health-care providers should assess a geriatric patient's cognitive status, decision-making capacity, frailty, advance care planning, medications, and anesthetic approach in a multidisciplinary fashion to ensure optimal care. The risks of postoperative cardiac, pulmonary, and renal complications should be evaluated and optimized preoperatively to reduce the potential for adverse outcomes.