Regional anaesthesia and perioperative outcome

Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology

Volumn 19, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 521-525

  Tziavrangos, Evangelos ^a   Schug, Stephan A ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^c ROYAL PERTH HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

Anaesthesia; Analgesia; Epidural; Mortality; Outcome; Perioperative; Regional; Spinal

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL SURGERY; ANALGESIA; BLEEDING; CLINICAL TRIAL; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; DEEP VEIN THROMBOSIS; EPIDURAL ANESTHESIA; GENERAL ANESTHESIA; HEART ARRHYTHMIA; HEART SURGERY; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; KIDNEY FAILURE; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; LUNG EMBOLISM; META ANALYSIS; MORBIDITY; MORTALITY; NERVE BLOCK; OBSTETRIC ANESTHESIA; ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY; PATIENT CONTROLLED ANALGESIA; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PERIPHERAL NERVE; PNEUMONIA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGIONAL ANESTHESIA; RESPIRATION DEPRESSION; REVIEW; SPINAL ANESTHESIA; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; THORACOTOMY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ABDOMEN; ANALGESIA, PATIENT-CONTROLLED; ANALGESICS; ANESTHESIA, CONDUCTION; ANESTHESIA, EPIDURAL; ANESTHESIA, GENERAL; ANESTHESIA, SPINAL; CARDIAC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; DRUG ADMINISTRATION ROUTES; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; OBSTETRIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; ORTHOPEDIC PROCEDURES; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; PERIOPERATIVE CARE; THORACIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33748669434     PISSN: 09527907     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.aco.0000245278.22658.1e     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Wu CL, Cohen SR, Richman JM, et al. Efficacy of postoperative patient-controlled and continuous infusion epidural analgesia versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with opioids: a meta-analysis. Anesthesiology 2005; 103:1079-1088. A very comprehensive metaanalysis of the overall analgesic benefits of epidural analgesia in all indications showing general benefits.
2. ••], but focusing on abdominal surgery only.
3. Ballantyne JC, Carr DB, DeFerranti S, et al. The comparative effects of postoperative analgesic therapies on pulmonary outcome: cumulative meta-analyses of randomized, controlled trials. Anesth Analg 1998; 86:598-612.
4. Rodgers A, Walker N, Schug S, et al. Reduction of postoperative mortality and morbidity with epidural or spinal anaesthesia: results from overview of randomised trials. BMJ 2000; 321:1493.
5. Beattie WS, Badner NH, Choi P. Epidural analgesia reduces postoperative myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis. Anesth Analg 2001; 93:853-858.
6. Rigg JR, Jamrozik K, Myles PS, et al. Epidural anaesthesia and analgesia and outcome of major surgery: a randomised trial. Lancet 2002; 359:1276-1282.
7. Park WY, Thompson JS, Lee KK. Effect of epidural anesthesia and analgesia on perioperative outcome: a randomized, controlled Veterans Affairs cooperative study. Ann Surg 2001; 234:560-569; discussion 569-571.
8. Schug SA. The effect of neuraxial blockade on peri-operative mortality and major morbidity: an updated meta-analysis [abstract]. Anaesth Intens Care 2005; 33:675.
9. Ballantyne JC, Kupelnick B, McPeek B, et al. Does the evidence support the use of spinal and epidural anesthesia for surgery? J Clin Anesth 2005; 17:382-391. A very well conceptualized approach to the complex issues addressed in the title with answers provided by systematic reviews and new metaanalyses, explaining the difficulties in offering a final solution to the problem.
10. Wu CL, Hurley RW, Anderson GF, et al. Effect of postoperative epidural analgesia on morbidity and mortality following surgery in medicare patients. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2004; 29:525-533.
11. Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists, Faculty of Pain Medicine. Acute pain management: scientific evidence. 2nd ed. Melbourne: Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists; 2005. http://www.anzca.edu. au/publications/acutepain.htm. [Accessed 25 July 2006] A most comprehensive and far-reaching up-to-date document, providing a careful and evidence-based summary of the current evidence in managing acute pain of all kinds.
12. Richman JM, Wu CL. Epidural analgesia for postoperative pain. Anesthesiol Clin North Am 2005; 23:125-140.
13. Steinbrook RA. Epidural anesthesia and gastrointestinal motility. Anesth Analg 1998; 86:830-836.
14. Jorgensen H, Wetterslev J, Moiniche S, et al. Epidural local anaesthetics versus opioid-based analgesic regimens on postoperative gastrointestinal paralysis, PONV and pain after abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000(4):CD001893.
15. Holte K, Kehlet H. Epidural analgesia and risk of anastomotic leakage. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2001; 26:111-117.
16. Kehlet H. Fast-track colonic surgery: status and perspectives. Recent Results Cancer Res 2005; 165:8-13. A comprehensive review of the current data available on this most important issue with considerable economic consequences, but also providing some future directions on these issues by the most appropriate author of such a paper.
17. Kehlet H, Buchler MW, Beart RW Jr, et al. Care after colonic operation: is it evidence-based? Results from a multinational survey in Europe and the United States. J Am Coll Surg 2006; 202:45-54. A rather disillusioning survey of the discrepancies between evidence and clinical practice in this area of perioperative management.
18. Liu SS, Block BM, Wu CL. Effects of perioperative central neuraxial analgesia on outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery: a meta-analysis. Anesthesiology 2004; 101:153-161.
19. Ho AM, Chung DC, Joynt GM. Neuraxial blockade and hematoma in cardiac surgery: estimating the risk of a rare adverse event that has not (yet) occurred. Chest 2000; 117:551-555.
20. Horlocker TT, Wedel DJ, Benzon H, et al. Regional anesthesia in the anticoagulated patient: defining the risks (the second ASRA Consensus Conference on Neuraxial Anesthesia and Anticoagulation). Reg Anesth Pain Med 2003; 28:172-197.
21. Myles PS, Daly DJ, Djaiani G, et al. A systematic review of the safety and effectiveness of fast-track cardiac anesthesia. Anesthesiology 2003; 99:982-987.
22. Bong CL, Samuel M, Ng JM, et al. Effects of preemptive epidural analgesia on postthoracotomy pain. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2005; 19:786-793. A metaanalysis with disappointing results with regard to effects of epidural analgesia on the important complication of chronic postthoracotomy pain.
23. Ballantyne JC, Carr DB, Chalmers TC, et al. Postoperative patient-controlled analgesia: meta-analyses of initial randomized control trials [see comments]. J Clin Anesth 1993; 5:182-193.
24. Gottschalk A, Cohen SP, Yang S, et al. Preventing and treating pain after thoracic surgery. Anesthesiology 2006; 104:594-600.
25. Davies RG, Myles PS, Graham JM. A comparison of the analgesic efficacy and side-effects of paravertebral vs epidural blockade for thoracotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Br J Anaesth 2006; 96:418-426. An outstanding metaanalysis with the rather surprising result of superiority of a simple and less risky peripheral regional technique to epidural analgesia in this indication, which will influence future practice significantly.
26. Evans H, Steele SM, Nielsen KC, et al. Peripheral nerve blocks and continuous catheter techniques. Anesthesiol Clin North Am 2005; 23:141-162.
27. Katz J, Jackson M, Kavanagh BP, et al. Acute pain after thoracic surgery predicts long-term postthoracotomy pain. Clin J Pain 1996; 12:50-55.
28. Perkins FM, Kehlet H. Chronic pain as an outcome of surgery: a review of predictive factors. Anesthesiology 2000; 93:1123-1133.
29. Block BM, Liu SS, Rowlingson AJ, et al. Efficacy of postoperative epidural analgesia: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2003; 290:2455-2463.
30. Senturk M, Ozcan PE, Talu GK, et al. The effects of three different analgesia techniques on long-term postthoracotomy pain. Anesth Analg 2002; 94:11-15.
31. Beaupre LA, Jones CA, Saunders LD, et al. Best practices for elderly hip fracture patients: a systematic overview of the evidence. J Gen Intern Med 2005; 20:1019-1025. An attempt to provide evidence-based best practice guidelines for the perioperative management of this common surgery.
32. Parker MJ, Handoll HH, Griffiths R. Anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004(4):CD000521.
33. Lattermann R, Belohlavek G, Wittmann S, et al. The anticatabolic effect of neuraxial blockade after hip surgery. Anesth Analg 2005; 101:1202-1208.
34. Fischer HB, Simanski CJ. A procedure-specific systematic review and consensus recommendations for analgesia after total hip replacement. Anaesthesia 2005; 60:1189-1202. A procedure-specific evidence-based management recommendation from the PROSPECT group, whose website provide recommendations for a variety of surgical procedures, offered in a clinically useful way (http://www.postoppain.org/).
35. Guay J. The effect of neuraxial blocks on surgical blood loss and blood transfusion requirements: a meta-analysis. J Clin Anesth 2006; 18:124-128. A new metaanalysis confirming the previously shown benefits of neuraxial techniques.
36. Liu SS, Strodtbeck WM, Richman JM, et al. A comparison of regional versus general anesthesia for ambulatory anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Anesth Analg 2005; 101:1634-1642. A metaanalysis illustrating the potential benefits of regional techniques in this setting, but not showing a translation of these benefits into early discharge, possibly due to cultural and traditional reasons.
37. Borgeat A, Ekatodramis G, Schenker CA. Postoperative nausea and vomiting in regional anesthesia: a review. Anesthesiology 2003; 98:530-547.
38. Morin AM, Kratz CD, Eberhart LH, et al. Postoperative analgesia and functional recovery after total-knee replacement: comparison of a continuous posterior lumbar plexus (psoas compartment) block, a continuous femoral nerve block, and the combination of a continuous femoral and sciatic nerve block. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2005; 30:434-445. A randomized controlled trial showing analgesic superiority of a combined peripheral catheter technique, which again does not translate into functional outcome improvements.
39. Simkin PP, O'Hara M. Nonpharmacologic relief of pain during labor: systematic reviews of five methods. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186(Suppl 5):S131-S159.
40. Rosen MA. Nitrous oxide for relief of labor pain: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186 (Suppl 5):S110-S126.
41. Bricker L, Lavender T. Parenteral opioids for labor pain relief: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186 (Suppl 5):S94-S109.
42. Anim-Somuah M, Smyth R, Howell C. Epidural versus nonepidural or no analgesia in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005(4):CD000331. A Cochrane review of this obstetric topic, confirming most of the outcomes shown previously in the literature.
43. Hodnett ED. Pain and women's satisfaction with the experience of childbirth: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186 (Suppl 5):S160-S172.
44. •].
45. Van de Velde M. Neuraxial analgesia and fetal bradycardia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2005; 18:253-256.
46. Leighton BL, Halpern SH. The effects of epidural analgesia on labor, maternal, and neonatal outcomes: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186 (Suppl 5):S69-S77.
47. Reynolds F, Sharma SK, Seed PT. Analgesia in labour and fetal acid-base balance: a meta-analysis comparing epidural with systemic opioid analgesia. BJOG 2002; 109:1344-1353.
48. Bloom SL, Spong CY, Weiner SJ, et al. Complications of anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106:281-287. A prospective survey of over 35 000 caesarean deliveries in the United States, showing the widespread use of neuraxial blockade in this setting and the safety of obstetric anaesthesia achieved by this approach.
49. Ng K, Parsons J, Cyna AM, et al. Spinal versus epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004(2):CD003765.
50. Visalyaputra S, Rodanant O, Somboonviboon W, et al. Spinal versus epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery in severe preeclampsia: a prospective randomized, multicenter study. Anesth Analg 2005; 101:862-868.
51. Bonnet F, Marret E. Influence of anaesthetic and analgesic techniques on outcome after surgery. Br J Anaesth 2005; 95:52-58. A thoughtful discussion of the issues topical to the current review.