Spinal versus general anesthesia for patients undergoing outpatient total knee arthroplasty: a national propensity matched analysis of early postoperative outcomes

Impact of spinal or epidural anaesthesia on perioperative outcomes in adult noncardiac surgery: a narrative review of recent evidence

Spinal and epidural anaesthesia and analgesia are important anaesthetic techniques, familiar to all anaesthetists and applied to patients undergoing a range of surgical procedures. Although the immediate effects of a well-conducted neuraxial technique on nociceptive and sympathetic pathways are readily observable in clinical practice, the impact of such techniques on patient-centred perioperative outcomes remains an area of uncertainty and active research. The aim of this review is to present a narrative synthesis of contemporary clinical science on this topic from the most recent 5-year period and summarise the foundational scholarship upon which this research was based. We searched electronic databases for primary research, secondary research, opinion pieces, and guidelines reporting the relationship between neuraxial procedures and standardised perioperative outcomes over the period 2018-2023. Returned citation lists were examined seeking additional studies to contextualise our narrative synthesis of results. Articles were retrieved encompassing the following outcome domains: patient comfort, renal, sepsis and infection, postoperative cancer, cardiovascular, and pulmonary and mortality outcomes. Convincing evidence of the beneficial effect of epidural analgesia on patient comfort after major open thoracoabdominal surgery outcomes was identified. Recent evidence of benefit in the prevention of pulmonary complications and mortality was identified. Despite mechanistic plausibility and supportive observational evidence, there is less certain experimental evidence to support a role for neuraxial techniques impacting on other outcome domains. Evidence of positive impact of neuraxial techniques is best established for the domains of patient comfort, pulmonary complications, and mortality, particularly in the setting of major open thoracoabdominal surgery. Recent evidence does not strongly support a significant impact of neuraxial techniques on cancer, renal, infection, or cardiovascular outcomes after noncardiac surgery in most patient groups.

Risk factors of postoperative urinary retention following total hip and knee arthroplasty

Aims

The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine the pooled incidence of postoperative urinary retention (POUR) following total hip and knee arthroplasty (total joint replacement (TJR)) and to evaluate the risk factors and complications associated with POUR.

Methods

Two authors conducted searches in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus on TJR and urinary retention. Eligible studies that reported the rate of POUR and associated risk factors for patients undergoing TJR were included in the analysis. Patient demographic details, medical comorbidities, and postoperative outcomes and complications were separately analyzed. The effect estimates for continuous and categorical data were reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs, respectively.

Results

A total of 31 studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 29 studies entered our meta-analysis, which included 3,273 patients diagnosed with POUR and 11,583 patients without POUR following TJR. The pooled incidence of POUR was 28.06%. Demographic risk factors included male sex (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.59), increasing age (SMD 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.27), and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 3 to 4 (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.77). Patients with a history of benign prostatic hyperplasia (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.41 to 2.83) and retention (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.58 to 6.06) were more likely to develop POUR. Surgery-related risk factors included spinal anaesthesia (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.74) and postoperative epidural analgesia (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.82). Total hip arthroplasty was associated with higher odds of POUR compared to total knee arthroplasty (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.20). Postoperatively, POUR was associated with a longer length of stay (SMD 0.21, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.39).

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis demonstrated key risk variables for POUR following TJR, which may assist in identifying at-risk patients and direct patient-centered pathways to minimize this postoperative complication.

Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Outpatient Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in the Ambulatory Surgery Center: A Matched-Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Spinal anesthesia is the predominant regimen in outpatient total joint arthroplasty (TJA), but induction often is unsuccessful, unobtainable, or against patient preference. We compared outcomes of same-day discharge (SDD) TJA with spinal versus general anesthesia in a free-standing ambulatory surgery center (ASC).

METHODS

We took 105 general anesthesia TJA and one-to-one nearest-neighbor matched them to 105 spinal anesthesia TJA over 7 years at 1 ASC. The rate of successful SDD, minutes to discharge, postoperative pain and nausea, and 90-day complications were compared. Postanesthesia care unit outcomes were additionally stratified by spinal anesthetic (mepivacaine versus bupivacaine).

RESULTS

All spinal anesthetic patients underwent SDD compared with 103 (98%) general anesthetic patients (P = .498). Mepivacaine spinal anesthesia patients spent the fewest minutes in postanesthesia care unit prior to discharge from the facility (206), followed by general anesthesia (227), and bupivacaine spinal anesthesia (291; P < .001). General anesthesia patients had the highest levels of pain at 1 hour (5.2 versus 1.5 versus 1.5) and 2 hours (3.2 versus 2.0 versus 1.3) postoperatively, and rates of nausea (48 versus 22 versus 28%) compared with mepivacaine and bupivacaine spinal anesthesia, respectively. The 90-day complications (6 versus 7), admissions (1 versus 3), and reoperations (5 versus 2) were similar among spinal and general anesthesia, respectively (P ≥ .445).

CONCLUSIONS

Both spinal and general anesthesia led to reliable SDD with similar 90-day complication rates. General anesthesia facilitated faster discharge from the ASC compared with bupivacaine spinal anesthesia but led to higher levels of pain and incidence of nausea postoperatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3, Retrospective Cohort Comparison.

Is a Failed Spinal Attempt Associated With a Worse Clinical Course Following Primary Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Spinal anesthesia (SA) is the preferred anesthesia modality for total joint arthroplasty (TJA). However, studies establishing SA as preferential may be subject to selection bias given that general anesthesia (GA) is often selectively utilized on more difficult, higher-risk operations. The optimal comparison group, therefore, is the patient converted to GA due to a failed attempt at SA. The purpose of this study was to determine risk factors and outcomes following failed SA with conversion to GA during primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

A consecutive cohort of 4,483 patients who underwent primary TJA at our institution was identified (2,004 THA and 2,479 TKA). Of these patients, 3,307 underwent GA (73.8%), 1,056 underwent SA (23.3%), and 130 patients failed SA with conversion to GA (2.90%). Primary outcomes included rescue analgesia requirement in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), time to ambulation, pain scores in the PACU, estimated blood loss, and 90-day complications.

RESULTS

Risk factors for SA failure included older age and a higher comorbidity burden. Failure of SA was associated with increased estimated blood loss, rescue intravenous opioid use, and time to ambulation when compared to the successful SA group in both THA and TKA patients (P < .001). The anesthesia modality was not associated with significant differences in PACU pain scores. The 90-day complication rate was similar between the failed SA and GA groups. There was a higher incidence of postoperative pain prompting unplanned visits and thromboembolism when comparing failed SA to successful SA in both THA and TKA patients (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series, patients who had failed SA demonstrated inferior outcomes to patients receiving successful SA and similar outcomes to patients receiving GA who did not have an SA attempt. This emphasizes the importance of success in the initial attempt at SA for optimizing outcomes following TJA.

Substantial Improvement in Self-Reported Mental Health Following Total Hip Arthroplasty Occurs Independent of Anesthetic Technique

BACKGROUND

The influence of anesthetic type on mental health after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is poorly understood. Adverse effects of general anesthesia (GA) on cognition following major non-cardiac surgery are well known, but mental health following THA is less well-studied. We hypothesized that neuraxial anesthesia (NA) would provide favorable mental health profiles compared with GA after THA.

METHODS

Prospectively collected Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-10 (PROMIS) Global Mental Health (GMH) scores at preoperative baseline, and 1, 3, and 6 months after THA were accessed on 4,353 patients in the Pulmonary Embolism Prevention After HiP and KneE Replacement (PEPPER) Trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02810704). Anesthesia was categorized as: general (GA), neuraxial (NA), and neuraxial with peripheral block (NAP). The GMH was assessed longitudinally and compared between groups.

RESULTS

Postoperative GMH improved (P < .05) over preoperative in every anesthetic group. Groups receiving NA had higher baseline GMH scores. Improvement in GMH was diminished after GA alone and plateaued after 1 month. Adding NA or peripheral nerve block to GA conferred additional benefit to GMH improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-perceived mental health improves significantly after THA regardless of anesthetic type. Patients who have higher baseline GMH scores more commonly received NA, likely due to nonsurgical care determinants; these differences in mental wellness persisted at follow-up. Adjunctive NA or peripheral nerve block favored GMH improvement, whereas solitary GA diminished GMH improvement, which plateaued after 1 month. Substantial mental health benefits of THA may overshadow subtle differences in GMH attributable to anesthetic type.

Administration of Low-dose Hyperbaric Bupivacaine for Spinal Anesthesia in the Setting of Outpatient Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

With the rise of ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), rapid motor and sensory recovery after anesthesia is crucial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of low-dose single-shot hyperbaric bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia (SA) for patients undergoing outpatient arthroplasty.

METHODS

Data were reviewed from a single ASC from 2018 to 2020 for two arthroplasty-trained surgeons for all patients with primary arthroplasties that had administration of low-dose hyperbaric bupivacaine. Data collected from the ASC records were then further evaluated for total spinal block time, length of blockade, time to discharge criteria, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and time to discharge.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-seven patients undergoing 244 primary arthroplasties received SA with low-dose hyperbaric bupivacaine. The volume of 0.75% bupivacaine varied: 115 patients received 0.8 mL (6 mg), 111 patients received 1.0 mL (7.5 mg), and 17 patients received 1.2 mL (9 mg). Total SA time averaged 144 minutes with a mean of 30 minutes from post anesthesia care unit arrival to motor recovery. The mean time from post anesthesia care unit arrival to discharge criteria was 89 minutes. The average VAS at discharge was 1.44; the average VAS on POD1 was 3.0. No episodes of urinary retention and no reports of transient neurologic symptoms were noted in the study population.

CONCLUSION

Low-dose, single-shot hyperbaric bupivacaine SA is an effective option in the ASC for arthroplasty, providing a fast return of motor function, facilitating rapid discharge, and is safe with a relatively low-risk profile.

Regional versus general anesthesia for total hip and knee arthroplasty: a nationwide retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to determine whether regional anesthesia (RA) has any advantages over general anesthesia (GA) in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in terms of mortality and postoperative complications.

METHODS

This population-based retrospective cohort study included data of adults who underwent total knee or hip arthroplasty under RA or GA between 2016 and 2021 from the National Health Insurance Service of South Korea. RA included spinal or epidural anesthesia or a combination of both. Endpoints were 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and postoperative complications. Propensity score (PS) matching was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

We included 517 960 patients (RA, n=380 698; GA, n=137 262) who underwent TJA. After PS matching, 186 590 patients (93 295 in each group) were included in the final analysis. In the logistic regression analyses using the PS-matched cohort, the RA group compared with the GA group showed 31% (OR: 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.80; p<0.001) and 22% (OR: 0.78; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.85; p<0.001) lower 30-day and 90-day mortality rates, respectively. However, the total postoperative complication rate did not differ significantly between the two groups (p=0.105).

CONCLUSION

RA compared with GA was associated with improved 30-day and 90-day survival outcomes in patients who underwent TJA. However, the postoperative complication rate did not differ significantly. Therefore, our results should be interpreted with caution, and more well-designed future studies are needed to clarify the most appropriate type of anesthesia for TJA.

Multicenter, prospective cohort study: immediate postoperative gains in active range of motion following robotic-assisted total knee replacement compared to a propensity-matched control using manual instrumentation

BACKGROUND

Range of motion (ROM) following total knee replacement (TKR) has been associated with patient satisfaction and knee function, and is also an early indicator of a successful procedure. Robotic-assisted TKR (raTKR) is considered to reproduce more precise resections, and, as a result, may be associated with improved early patient satisfaction compared to manual TKR (mTKR). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the early postoperative active ROM (aROM) between raTKR and mTKR.

METHODS

A total of 216 mTKR patients were propensity-matched, in terms of age, gender, comorbidities, and BMI, to 216 raTKR cases. Intraoperative and immediate postoperative adverse events were collected. Knee flexion and extension aROM were measured preoperatively and at one- and three months after operation.

RESULTS

Changes in flexion aROM were significantly greater in raTKR vs. mTKR at one- (6.9°, 95% CI: 3.5, 10.4°) and three months (4.9°, 95% CI: 2.1, 7.7°). Flexion aROM was greater at three postoperative months compared to preoperative aROM only in the raTKR group, and raTKR patients had higher odds of achieving ≥ 90° of flexion at one month after operation (OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.16, 3.99). There were no significant differences between groups in intraoperative (P > 0.999) or postoperative adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with mTKR, raTKR resulted  in less loss of aROM immediately after operation and a faster recovery of aROM within three months after operation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT# 03737149).

Total joint replacement in ambulatory surgery

Total joint arthroplasty is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in the United States, and projected numbers are expected to double in the next ten years. From 2018 to 2020, total hip and knee arthroplasty were removed from the United States' Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services "inpatient-only" list, accelerating this migration to the ambulatory setting. Appropriate patient selection, including age, body mass index, comorbidities, and adequate social support, is critical for successful ambulatory total joint arthroplasty. General anesthesia and neuraxial anesthesia are both safe and effective anesthetic choices, and recent studies in this population have found no difference in outcomes. Multimodal analgesia, including acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, local infiltration analgesia, and peripheral nerve blocks, is the foundation for adequate pain control. Common reasons for "failure to launch" include postoperative urinary retention, postoperative nausea and vomiting, inadequate analgesia, and hypotension.

Postoperative complications of spinal vs general anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing hip hemiarthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Elderly patients with hip fractures are at high risk for mortality due to postsurgical complications. Hip hemiarthroplasty is a routine procedure done in elderly patients for surgical repair  of femoral neck fractures. Both general and spinal anesthesia can be used in elderly patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty. Rates of postoperative complications among the two anesthetic choices have not been directly compared. In this study, we compare the rates of postoperative complications in elderly patients (age greater than 70) undergoing hip hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures using a national database.

METHODS

Data for the years 2015-2020 from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) were used for the study. Patients greater than 70 years of age who received a hip hemiarthroplasty with general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia were identified using CPT procedure codes. Pertinent preoperative variables and rates of postoperative complications were characterized and analyzed.

RESULTS

Our study found that elderly patients who received spinal anesthesia had, on average, longer length of stays but shorter operative times compared to patients who received general anesthesia. Furthermore, we found that patients who received spinal anesthesia had lower rates of systemic sepsis, cardiac arrests, and blood transfusions when compared to patients who received general anesthesia. Finally, we found that overall rates of mortality were significantly lower in the spinal anesthesia cohort compared to the general anesthesia cohort.

CONCLUSION

Our work suggests that patients who underwent spinal anesthesia for hip arthroplasty may have lower rates of postoperative complications. This work further highlights the role of anesthetic choice in preventing complications following hip hemiarthroplasty procedures.

Current indications for spinal anesthesia-a narrative review

Spinal anesthesia is a commonly performed regional anesthesia technique by most anesthesiologists worldwide. This technique is learned early during training and is relatively easy to master. Despite being an old technique, spinal anesthesia has evolved and developed in various aspects. This review attempts to highlight the current indications of this technique. Understanding the finer aspects and knowledge gaps will help postgraduates and practicing anesthesiologists in designing patient-specific techniques and interventions.

Spinal Versus General Anesthesia in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Are There Differences in Complication and Readmission Rates?

BACKGROUND

Spinal anesthesia (SP) utilization continues to expand in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, little is known regarding differences in complication rates between spinal and general anesthesia used for primary TKA. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare the length of stay (LOS), operative time, and readmission and revision rates between patients who received spinal and general anesthesia during TKA.

METHODS

The American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR) was used to identify primary elective TKA patients from 2017 to 2020. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts, general (GN) and SP, based on the mode of anesthesia administered during the index surgery. In total, 270,251 TKAs were identified, of which 126,970 (47.0%) received general anesthesia and 143,281 (53.0%) received spinal anesthesia. Length of stay, operative time, 90-day readmission, and 90-day revisions were compared between the 2 groups. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to adjust for potential confounders.

RESULTS

After accounting for confounding factors, SP was associated with a lower risk of having a LOS greater than 3 days (odds ratio [OR] 0.470, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.454-0.487, P < .0001), but a slightly higher likelihood of having a longer operative time (OR 1.075, 95% CI 1.056-1.094, P < .0001). SP was also linked to lower rates of 90-day readmission (OR 0.845, 95% CI 0.790-0.904, P < .0001) and lower risk of 90-day all-cause revision (OR 0.506, 95% CI 0.462-0.555, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

SP was associated with a lower 90-day readmission rate and a lower risk of 90-day revision. These findings support the best practice guidelines of The Joint Commission to use spinal anesthesia when possible as part of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway.

Impact of Anesthetic Choice on Time to Discharge for Same-Day Discharge Joints

INTRODUCTION

As total joint arthroplasty programs continue to move towards same-day discharge (SDD), time to discharge is an increasingly important performance indicator. The primary objective of this study was to determine the impact of the choice of anesthetic on the time to discharge after SDD primary hip and knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted within our SDD arthroplasty program, with 261 patients identified for analysis. Baseline characteristics, length of surgery, anesthetic drug, dose, and perioperative complications were extracted and recorded. The time from the patient leaving the operating room (OR) to physiotherapy (PT) assessment, and from OR to discharge were recorded. These were referred to as ambulation time and discharge time respectively.

RESULTS

The ambulation time was significantly reduced when hypobaric lidocaine was used in a spinal block compared to isobaric or hyperbaric bupivacaine-135 minutes (range, 39 to 286), 305 minutes (range, 46 to 591), 227 minutes (range, 77 to 387) respectively-p<0.0001). Similarly, the discharge time was also significantly lower with hypobaric lidocaine compared to isobaric bupivacaine, hyperbaric bupivacaine, and general anesthesia-276 minutes (range, 179 to 461), 426 minutes (range, 267 to 623), 375 minutes (range, 221 to 511), 371 minutes (range, 217 to 570) respectively-(p<0.0001). No cases of transient neurologic symptoms were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving a hypobaric lidocaine spinal block experienced significantly reduced ambulation time and time to discharge compared to other anesthetics. Surgical teams should feel confident in using hypobaric lidocaine during spinal anesthesia as it is quick and efficacious.

Comparison of general and regional anesthesia on short-term complications in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: A retrospective study using national health insurance service-national sample cohort

This retrospective study compared the mortality and short-term complications according to the choice of general anesthesia or regional anesthesia in patients who underwent a total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We searched the Korean National Health Insurance Service National Sample Cohort database to analyze data from patients who received a TKA between January 2002 and December 2015. Before comparing the general and the regional anesthesia groups, the bias was reduced by propensity score matching. After matching, the mortality and complications occurring within 30 days after a TKA were compared between the 2 groups. In the database, 6491 primary TKA cases were identified. Nine hundred forty-three patients (14.5%) had a TKA performed under general anesthesia, and 5548 (85.5%) had a TKA performed under regional anesthesia. After propensity score matching, the data of 1886 patients were analyzed, with 943 patients in each group. There was no significant difference in mortality (0.32% vs 0.00%), transfusion rate (84.52% vs 84.73%, P = .8989), and length of hospital stay (50 vs 53, P = .5391) between the general and regional anesthesia groups. Most of the complications were not significantly different, but the major complications, including myocardial infarction (1.70% vs 0.64%, P = .0414) and acute renal failure (0.85% vs 0.11%, P = .0391), were higher in the general anesthesia group than in the regional anesthesia group. Also, admission to the intensive care unit (8.48% vs 2.33%, P < .0001) and total cost (₩8067, 400 vs ₩7487, 940, P = .0002) were higher in the general anesthesia group than in the regional anesthesia group. Our study found that regional anesthesia for TKA is associated with a decrease in major complications, including myocardial infarction and acute renal failure, and medical costs.

Spinal anesthesia is a grossly underutilized gold standard in primary total joint arthroplasty: propensity-matched analysis of a national surgical quality database

BACKGROUND

There is currently no consensus regarding the optimal anesthetic technique for total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA, TKA). This study aimed to compare the utilization rates and safety of spinal vs. general anesthesia in contemporary THA/TKA practice.

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP), a retrospective review of 307,076 patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty under either spinal or general anesthesia between January 2015 and December 2018 was performed. Propensity matching was used to compare differences in operative times, hospital length of stay, discharge destination, and 30-day adverse events. The annual utilization rates for both techniques between 2011 and 2018 were also assessed.

RESULTS

Patients receiving spinal anesthesia had a shorter length of stay (P < 0.001) for TKA while no statistical differences in length of stay were observed for THA. Patients were also less likely to experience any 30-day complication (OR = 0.82, P <0.001 and OR = 0.92, P < 0.001 for THA and TKA, respectively) while being more likely to be discharged to home (OR = 1.46, P < 0.001 and OR = 1.44, P < 0.001 for THA and TKA, respectively). Between 2011 and 2018, spinal anesthesia utilization only increased by 1.4% for THA (P < 0.001) and decreased by 0.2% for TKA (P < 0.001), reaching 38.1% and 40.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Spinal anesthesia remains a grossly underutilized tool despite providing better perioperative outcomes compared to general anesthesia. As orthopedic surgeons navigate the challenges of value-based care, spinal anesthesia represents an invaluable tool that should be considered the gold standard in elective, primary total hip and knee arthroplasty.

Operative room time comparison between general and spinal anesthesia in total hip arthroplasty: an institutional study

PURPOSE

A relatively high expense with any procedure is total operative time; two components being the time spent anesthetizing the patient and time spent transferring the patient out of the operating room (OR). Both times can be affected by the anesthetic method used. This study compares different operative time intervals for both spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA), in patients undergoing a primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), to identify the most appropriate and cost-effective anesthetic method.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed at a single institution for primary total hip arthroplasty procedures performed in the year 2019. Primary THAs without complications performed by three orthopedic surgeons were selected. Anesthesia records for 200 patients were used to compare perioperative time intervals; 100 consecutive patients that received SA and 100 consecutive patients that received GA.

RESULTS

The time spent transferring the patient out of the operating room was 8 min for GA and 5 min for SA (p < 0.001). Total operative time for GA was 90 min and 87 min for SA (p = 0.3330). Total pre-operative time averaged 26 min in SA compared to 25 min in GA (p = 0.5874). Non-operative total time (all time components of patient interaction excluding surgery start to surgery finish) was significantly shorter in SA with an average of 52 compared to 56 in GA (p = 0.0151).

CONCLUSION

Time to transfer patient out of the OR and total non-operative time was significantly shorter in patients who received spinal anesthesia. These results and the complications of both general and spinal anesthesia should be taken into consideration when anesthetizing patients undergoing primary THA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Perioperative Outcomes of Immersive Virtual Reality as Adjunct Anesthesia in Primary Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

Background

Immersive virtual reality (IVR) is utilized as an adjunct to anesthesia to distract patients from their intraoperative environment, thereby potentially reducing sedative and narcotic medication usage. This study evaluated intraoperative and acute postoperative results of patients undergoing primary total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with and without IVR.

Methods

Utilizing IVR as an adjunct to spinal anesthesia, 18 primary THAs (n = 8) and TKAs (n = 10) were performed. These cases were 1:2 matched based on procedure type, age, sex, and body mass index to those performed without IVR. Intraoperative and postanesthesia care unit sedative/narcotic usage, vital signs, and pain scores were compared. Acute perioperative outcomes, including 24-hour oral morphine equivalent (OME), first ambulation distance, length of stay, and 30-day complications, were also analyzed. Pearson Chi-square and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests evaluated categorical and continuous variables, respectively.

Results

When compared to non-IVR primary THAs and TKAs, those performed with IVR utilized significantly less intraoperative sedation (48 mg vs 708 mg of propofol; P < .001) and trended toward less narcotic usage (13 mcg vs 39 mcg of fentanyl; P = .07). In the postanesthesia care unit, IVR and non-IVR patients showed no significant differences (P > .3) in vital signs, pain scores, or OME received. Additionally, similar (P > .3) postoperative outcomes were noted in both cohorts’ 24-hour OME use, distance at first ambulation, length of stay, and 30-day complications.

Conclusions

The use of spinal anesthesia with the IVR adjunct to perform primary THAs and TKAs appears to be well-tolerated and associated with less intraoperative sedative medication usage than spinal anesthesia alone.

Regional versus general anesthesia for ambulatory total hip and knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With the removal of both total knee and total hip arthroplasty from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' inpatient-only list, efforts to improve efficiency of the perioperative management of total joint patients have increased recently. The publication of several recent studies examining the impact of anesthesia type on outcomes has prompted the need to review the overall state of evidence for spinal versus general anesthesia for outpatient total joint arthroplasty.

RECENT FINDINGS

Overall complication rates are low in this carefully selected patient population. The majority of patients who are preselected for outpatient total joint arthroplasty appear to successfully achieve this outcome. Some retrospective studies have suggested a benefit for spinal anesthesia in terms of same-day discharge success but direct comparisons in prospective studies are lacking.

SUMMARY

The type of anesthesia used for total joint arthroplasty may have an important effect on outcomes. Until randomized control trials are performed we must rely on existing evidence, which suggests that both spinal and general anesthesia can lead to successful outcomes after ambulatory total joint arthroplasty.

Same Day Joint Replacement Surgery: Patient Selection and Perioperative Management

Joint replacements are increasingly performed as outpatient surgeries. The push toward ambulatory joint arthroplasty is driven in part by the changing current health care economics and reimbursement models. Patients' selection and well-designed perioperative care pathways are critical for the success of these procedures. The rate of complications after outpatient joint arthroplasty is comparable to the rate of complications in the ambulatory setting. Patient education, adequate social support, multimodal analgesia, regional anesthesia are key ingredients to the ambulatory care pathway after joint arthroplasty. Motor sparing nerve blocks are often used in these settings. Implementation of the elements of fast protocols can result in overall improvement of outcome metrics for all patients undergoing joint arthroplasty, including reduced length of stay and increased rate of home discharge.

Clinical Application of Perioperative Anaesthesia Management Based on Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Concept to Elderly Patients Undergoing Total Knee Replacement

Objective

To explore the clinical application effect of perioperative anesthesia management based on enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concept to elderly patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR).

Methods

By means of retrospective analysis, the medical data of elderly patients undergoing TKR treated in our hospital (02, 2019-02, 2020) were analyzed, and 100 patients were selected as the study objects according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and divided into the study group (SG) and reference group (RG) according to their admission order, with 50 cases each. Patients in SG received perioperative anesthesia management based on ERAS concept, and those in RG accepted routine perioperative anesthesia management, so as to compare the perioperative inflammatory factors levels, postoperative recovery indicators, and postoperative Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores between the two groups.

Results

Compared with RG after surgery, SG obtained significantly lower inflammatory factors levels (P < 0.001) and significantly better recovery indicators (P < 0.05), and the pain scores at postoperative 12 h and 24 h of SG were, respectively (1.46 ± 0.67) points and (2.00 ± 0.45) points, which were significantly lower than those of RG (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Perioperative anesthesia management based on EARS concept can improve the perioperative indicators of elderly patients undergoing TKR, result in less postoperative pain, and obtain a more desirable recovery.