Implementation of a spinal anesthesia and sedation protocol that reliably prolongs infant spinal anesthesia: Case series of 102 infants who received spinal anesthesia for urologic surgery

Sustainability in Urology: Ideas for a Greener Future

Sustainability in urology can be achieved via conscientious practices that minimize the negative impact of our services while achieving ethical and responsible patient care. We highlight novel and actionable ideas that could pave the path towards healthier, greener urological practice.

Regional Anesthesia for Neonates

Pain management in neonates and infants has many unique and important facets, particularly in former preterm infants. Untreated pain and surgical stress in neonates are associated with myriad negative sequelae, including deleterious inflammatory, autonomic, hormonal, metabolic, and neurologic effects. Meanwhile, opioid side effects are also very impactful and affect multiple systems and pathways, particularly in the neonatal and infant population. Regional anesthesia presents a unique opportunity to provide highly effective analgesia; prevent deleterious signaling cascade pathways within the endocrine, immune, and nervous systems from occurring; and create conditions to facilitate reduced reliance on opioids and other analgesics. In some cases, clinicians can completely avoid general anesthesia and systemic anesthetics. This review will discuss some of the unique aspects of pain management in neonates and infants and provide an overview of the different regional anesthetic options available, namely, spinal anesthesia, epidural anesthesia, and peripheral nerve blocks.

Spinal versus general anesthesia: Comparing outcomes in pediatric patients undergoing urologic procedures

INTRODUCTION

Available literature comparing spinal anesthesia (SA) to general anesthesia (GA) in the pediatric population describes multiple benefits in appropriately selected patients including cost reduction, lower incidence of complications, and shorter operative times. In patients undergoing urologic procedures, data are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to expand on the paucity of existing urologic literature as SA appears to be uniquely suited for a substantial number of its common pediatric procedures.

METHODS

Within a single institution, patients who had a urologic procedure performed under SA between May 2019 and July 2021 and were less than 18 months old were compared with a matched cohort of patients who had GA. The SA and GA groups were compared by two-sample t-tests, chi-square test for independence, and Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

There were a total of 184 SA and 202 GA patients. There was no significant difference in the demographics except that SA patients were younger and weighed less than GA patients. The patients in the SA group needed less opioids both during the surgery (0% vs 26.1% p N/A) and in the immediate postoperative period when compared with GA patients (0% vs 18.2% p N/A). The patients who had SA had fewer complications necessitating PICU admission, or cancellation of surgery (0% vs 6.8% p = 0.03). Total anesthesia and emergence time were lower for SA patients (41 vs 50.2 p = 0.001 & 3.4 vs 6.1 p = 0.001). Both surgery and total OR time were not different between the groups (37.6 vs 35.5 p = 0.35 and 56.3 vs 54.4 p = 0.49). Overall, raw material cost was also found to be lower per procedure in the SA group vs the GA group ($8.90 vs $38.8: 77% reduction). Adjusted total mean costs for the surgery were not different between groups. The reduction in opioid use postoperatively also suggests reduced cost in the management of postoperative pain in the SA group.

DISCUSSION

Total anesthesia time, opioid use, and serious complications were all significantly lower in the SA group. We did not find significant difference in total surgery cost between two groups. However, patients who had SA had better pain control and needed less rescue analgesics in the immediate postoperative period. No patients in either group were sent home with opioids.

CONCLUSION

Spinal anesthesia was found to be an equally effective and appropriate alternative to GA with many proposed benefits for common pediatric urologic procedures. With further research, SA may prove to be a safer alternative in patients at risk for complications related to GA general anesthesia while also offering a cost benefit.

Spinal anesthesia in infants undergoing urologic surgery duration greater than 60 minutes

INTRODUCTION

Spinal anesthesia (SA) has been safely utilized in infants. There are limited data regarding the safety and efficacy of SA in pediatric urologic surgery lasting ≥60 min. We outlined the perioperative course for infants undergoing single-injection 0.5% plain bupivacaine SA-only for urologic procedures lasting ≥60 min.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the safety and efficacy of SA for urologic surgery in infants lasting ≥60 min.

METHODS

We reviewed our prospectively maintained database of infants undergoing SA for urologic procedures lasting ≥60 min from May 2018 to March 2021. Patients received preoperative intranasal dexmedetomidine, some received intranasal fentanyl, and all patients received lidocaine cream applied preoperatively over the lumbar spine. Oral sucrose on a pacifier was provided as needed, and the patient's arms were swaddled for the procedure. Success was defined as no conversion to general anesthesia. Time points for start/end of spinal injection, procedure duration, wheels in/out of operating room (OR), and discharge were collected.

RESULTS

Of 245 cases conducted with SA during the study period, 76 (31%) infants underwent surgery lasting ≥60 min. Of these, 73 (96%) were successfully completed with SA alone. In the 3 cases converted to general anesthesia, 2 (67%) required mask anesthesia after 96 and 169 min (for the last <10 min of surgery), and one was converted to intubation before start of surgery. Median patient age was 6 (IQR 5-7) months, and median procedure length was 95 (IQR 75-120) minutes. Following initial preoperative intranasal dexmedetomidine ± fentanyl, at least one additional dose of IV sedative was given in 27 (36%) cases at a median time of 90 (IQR 60-120) minutes into surgery. Following closure, patients exited the OR after a median 10 (IQR 8-12) minutes and subsequently discharged after spending a median of 73 (IQR 61-96) minutes in recovery.

DISCUSSION

We describe pediatric urologic surgical cases lasting ≥60 min that employed single-injection intrathecal bupivacaine alone without adjunct intrathecal agents. In this report, SA was safely utilized in infants undergoing urologic procedures lasting at least 60 min, with about 40% of patients receiving additional IV dexmedetomidine and fentanyl. Non-medication measures (swaddling, oral sucrose) were important for maximizing patient comfort. Communication between surgeon and anesthesia as cases progress is key to maintaining adequate anesthesia.

CONCLUSION

A single-injection bupivacaine-only spinal anesthesia approach for urologic surgery lasting over an hour and up to 3 h is safe and effective in infants. Selecting appropriate candidates for SA should be a joint decision between the surgeon and the anesthesiologist.