Regional Anesthesia for Spine Surgery

Comparison of different concentrations of ropivacaine in epidural anesthesia for percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the optimal concentration of ropivacaine epidural anesthesia for clinical use in percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) by comparing the effects of different concentrations.

METHODS

Seventy patients scheduled for their first PTED procedure were enrolled in this randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomized to receive ropivacaine at varying concentrations (0.3% or 0.4%). Primary outcome measures included the numeric rating scale (NRS) and hip extension level (HEL). Secondary outcome measures included intraoperative fentanyl dosage and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

One patient withdrew due to severe postoperative complications. The remaining 69 patients were allocated to the 0.3% (n = 34) and 0.4% (n = 35) groups, respectively. Baseline characteristics showed no significant differences between the two groups (P > 0.05). The NRS score was significantly lower in the 0.4% group than in the 0.3% group (P < 0.01), whereas the HEL score was significantly higher (P < 0.001). The average fentanyl dose in the 0.4% group was significantly lower than that in the 0.3% group (P < 0.01). Postoperative complications occurred in five and two patients in the 0.3% and 0.4% groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although 0.4% ropivacaine (20 mL) impacts muscle strength, it does not impede PTED surgery. Given its effective analgesic properties and few postoperative complications, 0.4% ropivacaine can be considered a preferred dose for PTED.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (Registration number: ChiCTR2200060364; Registration Date: 29/5/2022) and on chictr.org.cn ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=171002 ).

Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Thoracolumbar Interfascial Plane Block in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of postoperative pain control between erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block in lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE electronic databases were searched for articles containing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1900 and January 2024. We extracted the postoperative mean pain score, the first 24-h postoperative morphine consumption, and their standard deviation from the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using the functions available in the metafor package in R software. We pooled continuous variables using an inverse variance method with a random-effects model and summarized them as standardized mean differences.

RESULTS

Five RCTs that directly compared the ESPB and TLIP block in lumbar spine surgery were included, enrolling 432 participants randomly into the two groups with 216 participants in each group. The pooled analyses showed that there was no significant difference between the ESPB and TLIP groups in terms of lower pain scores during the early (1 h) (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.10; 0.11), middle (12 h) (SMD -3.12, 95% CI, -6.86; 0.61), and late (24 h) (SMD -1.38, 95% CI, -3.01; 0.24) postoperative periods. There was also no significant difference in the first 24-h postoperative morphine equivalent consumption between the ESPB and TLIP groups (SMD -0.46 mg, 95% CI -1.23; 0.31).

CONCLUSION

No significant difference was observed between the ESPB and TLIP block in terms of postoperative pain control and 24-h morphine equivalent consumption for lumbar spine surgery.

Pushing the Limits of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery-From Preoperative to Intraoperative to Postoperative Management

The introduction of minimally invasive surgery ushered in a new era of spine surgery by minimizing the undue iatrogenic injury, recovery time, and blood loss, among other complications, of traditional open procedures. Over time, technological advancements have further refined the care of the operative minimally invasive spine patient. Moreover, pre-, and postoperative care have also undergone significant change by way of artificial intelligence risk stratification, advanced imaging for surgical planning and patient selection, postoperative recovery pathways, and digital health solutions. Despite these advancements, challenges persist necessitating ongoing research and collaboration to further optimize patient care in minimally invasive spine surgery.

Combined segmental spinal epidural for major spine surgery: a case report

A woman in her mid-50s, hesitant about general anaesthesia due to a difficult airway, opted for neuraxial anaesthesia for L4 laminectomy with pedicle screw fixation (L3-L5). Preoperatively, she received 150 µg buprenorphine and 1 mg midazolam. In lateral position, a T8-T9 epidural catheter was placed, followed by segmental spinal anaesthesia (2.5 mL 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine+30 µg clonidine) at T10-T11. Prone positioning was executed using standard techniques. During the 6-7 hours surgery, three 7 mL epidural top-ups (2% lignocaine epinephrine) were administered at 90 min intervals. Haemodynamics remained stable with 2.5 L crystalloids, 350 mL packed red cells and three ephedrine doses (6 mg each). Sedation included 150 µg buprenorphine and two 1 mg midazolam doses. Postoperatively, she received epidural 0.25% bupivacaine for 2 days, systemic analgesics and was discharged on the sixth day.

Anaesthetic subspecialties and sustainable healthcare: a narrative review

The principles of environmentally sustainable healthcare as applied to anaesthesia and peri-operative care are well documented. Associated recommendations focus on generic principles that can be applied to all areas of practice. These include reducing the use of inhalational anaesthetic agents and carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of modern peri-operative care. However, four areas of practice have specific patient, surgical and anaesthetic factors that present barriers to the implementation of some of these principles, namely: neuroanaesthesia; obstetric; paediatric; and cardiac anaesthesia. This narrative review describes these factors and synthesises the available evidence to highlight areas of sustainable practice clinicians can address today, as well as posing several unanswered questions for the future. In neuroanaesthesia, improvements can be made by undertaking awake surgery, moving towards more reusables and embracing telemedicine in quaternary services. Obstetric anaesthesia continues to present questions regarding how services can move away from nitrous oxide use or limit its release to the environment. The focus for paediatric anaesthesia is addressing the barriers to total intravenous and regional anaesthesia. For cardiac anaesthesia, a significant emphasis is determining how to focus the substantial resources required on those who will benefit from cardiac interventions, rather than universal implementation. Whilst the landscape of evidence-based sustainable practice is evolving, there remains an urgent need for further original evidence in healthcare sustainability targeting these four clinical areas.

Awake Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression Under Local Anesthesia for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in the Elderly: A Feasibility Study with Technique Note

Purpose

Here, we introduce a novel strategy of awake unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) decompression, which applies conscious sedation combined with stepwise local anesthesia (LA) as an alternative to general anesthesia (GA). The study aims to evaluate the feasibility of awake UBE decompression for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) in elderly patients.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective study included 31 consecutive patients who received awake UBE decompression for DLSS in our institution from January 2021 to March 2022. Clinical results were evaluated using patient-reported outcomes measures (PROM) including visual analog scale for leg pain (VAS-LP), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria. The anesthesia effectiveness and intraoperative experience were evaluated by intraoperative VAS and satisfaction rating system.

Results

UBE decompression was successfully performed in all patients under LA combined with conscious sedation. 26 (83.9%) patients rated the intraoperative experience as satisfactory (excellent or good) and 5 (16.1%) as fair. The mean intraoperative VAS was 3.41±1.26. The VAS and ODI at each follow-up stage after surgery were significantly improved compared to preoperative scores (p < 0.01). At the last follow-up, 28 patients (90.3%) classified the surgical outcome as good or excellent, and 3 (9.7%) as fair. There were no serious complications or adverse reactions observed in the study.

Conclusion

Our preliminary results suggest that awake UBE decompression is a feasible and promising alternative for elderly patients with DLSS.

Awake Spinal Fusion Is Associated with Reduced Length of Stay, Opioid Use, and Time to Ambulation Compared to General Anesthesia: A Matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

There is increasing interest in performing awake spinal fusion under spinal anesthesia (SA). Evidence supporting SA has been positive, albeit limited. The authors set out to investigate the effects of SA versus general anesthesia (GA) for spinal fusion procedures on length of stay (LOS), opioid use, time to ambulation (TTA), and procedure duration.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective review of a single surgeon's patients who underwent lumbar fusions under SA versus GA from June of 2020 to June of 2022. SA patients were compared to demographically matched GA counterparts undergoing comparable procedures. Analyzed outcomes include operative time, opioid usage in morphine milligram equivalents, TTA, and LOS.

RESULTS

Ten SA patients were matched to 10 GA counterparts. The cohort had a mean age of 66.77, a mean body mass index of 27.73 kg/m2, and a median American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Score of 3.00. LOS was lower in SA versus GA patients (12.87 vs. 50.79 hours, P = 0.001). Opioid utilization was reduced in SA versus GA patients (10.76 vs. 31.43 morphine milligram equivalents, P = 0.006). TTA was reduced in SA versus GA patients (7.22 vs. 29.87 hours, P = 0.022). Procedure duration was not significantly reduced in SA patients compared to GA patients (139.3 vs. 188.2 minutes, P = 0.089).

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary retrospective results suggest the use of SA rather than GA for lumbar fusions is associated with reduced hospital LOS, reduced opioid utilization, and reduced TTA. Future randomized prospective studies are warranted to determine if SA usage truly leads to these beneficial outcomes.

Regional anesthesia in spine surgery: A narrative review

Background: Regional anesthesia, which refers to the use of anesthetics to provide analgesia to a specific body part or nervous innervation territory, has become increasingly popular in the field of spine surgery. With the application of these techniques, it has been postulated that patients will require less systemic analgesia, intraoperatively and postoperatively. The authors of this narrative review discuss the common regional anesthetic modalities applied to spine surgery, in addition to patient selection criteria, success in patients with multiple comorbid illnesses, and its adoption by surgeons. Materials and Methods: An advanced search was performed in the PubMed database to obtain Englishlanguage articles discussing regional anesthesia, awake spine surgery, and postoperative complications. Articles were screened for relevance, and 47 articles were incorporated into this narrative review. Results: Classic neuraxial and paraspinal techniques have allowed surgeons to perform posterior decompression, fusion, and revision procedures. Transversus abdominus plane and quadratus lumborum blocks have enabled better pain control in patients undergoing surgeries requiring anterior or lateral approaches. Documented benefits of regional anesthesia include shorter operative time, improved pain control and hemodynamic stability, as well as decreased cost and length of stay. Several case series have demonstrated the success of these techniques in highly comorbid patients. Conclusion: Regional anesthesia provides an exciting opportunity to make surgical treatment possible for spine patients with significant comorbidities. Although additional randomized controlled trials are necessary to further refine patient selection criteria, current data demonstrates its safety and efficacy in the operating room.

The efficacy of thoracolumbar interfascial plane block for lumbar spinal surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The intent of this meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of thoracolumbar interfascial plane block (TLIP) for pain control after lumbar spinal surgery.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published on PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science databases up to February 10, 2023, comparing TLIP with no or sham block or wound infiltration for lumbar spinal surgeries were included. Pain scores, total analgesic consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs were eligible. Comparing TLIP with no block or sham block, the meta-analysis showed a significant decrease of pain scores at rest and movement at 2 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 24 h. Pooled analysis of four studies showed a significant difference in pain scores at rest between TLIP and wound infiltration group at 8 h but not at 2 h, 12 h, and 24 h. Total analgesic consumption was significantly reduced with TLIP block as compared to no block/sham block and wound infiltration. TLIP block also significantly reduced PONV. GRADE assessment of the evidence was moderate.

CONCLUSION

Moderate quality evidence indicates that TLIP blocks are effective in pain control after lumbar spinal surgeries. TLIP reduces pain scores at rest and movement for up to 24 h, reduces total analgesic consumption, and the incidence of PONV. However, evidence of its efficacy as compared to wound infiltration of local anesthetics is scarce. Results should be interpreted with caution owing low to moderate quality of the primary studies and marked heterogeneity.

Comparative effectiveness of anesthetic technique on outcomes after lumbar spine surgery: a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, 2009-2019

BACKGROUND

The impact of anesthetic technique on spine surgery outcomes is controversial. Using a large national sample of patients, we compared outcomes after lumbar decompression under regional anesthesia (RA: spinal or epidural) or general anesthesia (GA).

METHODS

A retrospective population-based study of American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data (2009-2019). Patients were propensity score (PS) matched 3:1 (GA:RA) on demographic and surgical variables. The primary outcome was the association between anesthetic type and any complication (cardiac, pulmonary, renal, transfusion, stroke, infectious, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolus). Secondary outcomes included the association between anesthetic type and individual complications, readmission and length of stay (LOS). Unadjusted comparisons (OR, 95% CI), logistic regression and adjusted generalized linear modeling (parameter estimate, PE, 95% CI) were performed before and after PS matching.

RESULTS

Of 1 51 010 cases, 149 996 (99.3%) were performed under GA, and 1014 (0.67%) under RA. After matching, 3042 patients with GA were compared with 1014 patients with RA. On unadjusted analyses, RA was associated with lower odds of complications (OR 0.43, 0.3 to 0.6, p<0.001), shorter LOS (RA: 1.1±3.8 days vs GA: 1.3±3.0 days; p<0.001) and fewer blood transfusions (RA: 3/1014, 0.3% vs GA: 40/3042, 1.3%; p=0.004). In adjusted analyses, RA was associated with fewer complications (PE -0.43, -0.81 to -0.06, p=0.02) and shorter LOS (PE -0.76, -0.90 to -0.63, p<0.001). There was no significant association between anesthetic type and readmission (PE -0.34, -0.74 to 0.05, p=0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with GA, RA was associated with fewer complications, less blood transfusion and shorter LOS after spine surgery. Although statistically significant, the magnitude of effects was small and requires further prospective study.

Regional anaesthesia: what surgical procedures, what blocks and availability of a “block room”?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With an expected rise in day care procedures with enhanced recovery programs, the use of specific regional anaesthesia can be useful. In this review, we will provide insight in the used regional block and medication so far known and its applicability in a day care setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Regional anaesthesia has been improved with the aid of ultrasound-guided placement. However, it is not commonly used in the outpatient setting. Old, short acting local anaesthetics have found a second life and may be especially beneficial in the ambulatory setting replacing more long-acting local anaesthetics such as bupivacaine.To improve efficiency, a dedicated block room may facilitate the performance of regional anaesthesia. However, cost-efficacy for improved operating time, patient care and hospital efficiency has to be established.

SUMMARY

Regional anaesthesia has proven to be beneficial in ambulatory setting. Several short acting local anaesthetics are favourable over bupivacaine in the day care surgery. And if available, there are reports of the benefit of an additional block room used in a parallel (monitored) care of patients.