Furthermore, we encountered no complications.CONCLUSION: Based on our results, we conclude that SA is reliable and clinically successful procedure in lumbar microdiscectomy.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:AIM: To compare the effects of spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) in lumbar microdiscectomy in terms of their costeffectiveness, and perioperative outcomes.MATERIAL and METHODS: We randomly allocated 100 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo elective lumbarmicrodiscectomy, into either SA or GA groups.We recorded and evaluated various parameters, including demographic aspects, body mass index (BMI), perioperativehemodynamics, time elapsed from operating room (OR) entry until incision, operative time, time elapsed from application of thesurgical dressing to exiting OR, blood loss, post anesthetic care unit (PACU) time, preoperative and postoperative pain scores,postoperative analgesic requirements, first mobilization time, first oral intake, the length of hospital stay, time to return to work, andperioperative anesthetic costs.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The patients, anesthesiologists, and neurosurgeons were handed a questionnaire before dischargeto determine their satisfaction with the procedure.RESULTS: Several variables were found to be better in the SA group: the mean arterial pressure and heart rate changes weresignificantly lower, and the time elapsed from OR entry until incision, operative time, time elapsed from application of the surgicaldressing to exiting OR, PACU time, the length of hospital stay, and time to return to work were shorter; furthermore, the postoperative pain scores, the analgesic requirements, the intraoperative blood loss, and the cost of anesthesia were all lower.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Furthermore, we encountered no complications.CONCLUSION: Based on our results, we conclude that SA is reliable and clinically successful procedure in lumbar microdiscectomy.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters
Özet
AIM: To compare the effects of spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) in lumbar microdiscectomy in terms of their costeffectiveness, and perioperative outcomes.MATERIAL and METHODS: We randomly allocated 100 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo elective lumbarmicrodiscectomy, into either SA or GA groups.We recorded and evaluated various parameters, including demographic aspects, body mass index (BMI), perioperativehemodynamics, time elapsed from operating room (OR) entry until incision, operative time, time elapsed from application of thesurgical dressing to exiting OR, blood loss, post anesthetic care unit (PACU) time, preoperative and postoperative pain scores,postoperative analgesic requirements, first mobilization time, first oral intake, the length of hospital stay, time to return to work, andperioperative anesthetic costs. The patients, anesthesiologists, and neurosurgeons were handed a questionnaire before dischargeto determine their satisfaction with the procedure.RESULTS: Several variables were found to be better in the SA group: the mean arterial pressure and heart rate changes weresignificantly lower, and the time elapsed from OR entry until incision, operative time, time elapsed from application of the surgicaldressing to exiting OR, PACU time, the length of hospital stay, and time to return to work were shorter; furthermore, the postoperative pain scores, the analgesic requirements, the intraoperative blood loss, and the cost of anesthesia were all lower. Moreoverthe first mobilization and oral intake occurred earlier; and most significantly, the satisfaction of the patients and surgeons was higherin the SA group. Furthermore, we encountered no complications.CONCLUSION: Based on our results, we conclude that SA is reliable and clinically successful procedure in lumbar microdiscectomy.
🔖
Cite This Article
KILIC, E. T., NADERİ, S. (2019). Effects of Anesthesia Protocol on Perioperative Outcomes and Costs of Lumbar Microdiscectomies. Turkish Neurosurgery, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 6, 843–850. https://ajindex.com/articles/404436
Agarwal P, Pierce J, Welch W: Cost analysis of spinal versus general anesthesia for lumbar diskectomy and laminectomy spine surgery. World Neurosurg 89:266-271, 2016 2. Attari MA, Mirhosseini SA, Honarmand A, Safavi MR: Spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for elective lumbar spine surgery: A randomized clinical trial. J Res Med Sci 16:524–529, 2011 3. Dagistan Y, Okmen K, Dagistan E, Guler A, Ozkan N: Lumbar microdiscectomy under spinal and general anesthesia: A comparative study. Turkish Neurosurgery 25:685–689, 2015 4. De Rojas JO, Syre P, Welch WC: Regional anesthesia versus general anesthesia for surgery on the lumbar spine: A review of the modern literature. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 119:39–43, 2014 5. Demirel CB, Kalayci M, Ozkocak I, Altunkaya H, Ozer Y, Acikgoz B: A prospective randomized study comparing perioperative outcome variables after epidural or general anesthesia for lumbar disc surgery. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 15:185–192, 2003 6. Hassi N, Badaoui R, Cagny-Bellet A, Sifeddine S, Ossart M: Spinal anesthesia for disc herniation and lumbar laminectomy. Apropos of 77 cases. Can Anesthesiol 43:221-225, 1995 7. Kahveci K, Doger C, Ornek D, Gokcinar D, Aydemir S, Ozay R: Perioperative outcome and cost-effectiveness of spinal versus general anesthesia for lumbar spine surgery. Neurologia i Neurochirurgia Polska 48:167–173, 2014 8. Kara I, Celik JB, Bahar OC: Comparison of spinal and general anesthesia in lumbar disc surgery. Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish) 28:487–496, 2011 9. Karaman S, Karaman T, Dogru S: Retrospective evaluation of anesthesia approaches for lumbar disc surgery. Journal of Anesthesia and Clinical Research 5:4, 2014 10. McLain RF, Tetzlaff JE, Bell GR, Uwe-Lewandrowski K, Yoon HJ, Rana M: Microdiscectomy: Spinal anesthesia offers optimal results in general patient population. J Surg Orthop Adv 16:5–11, 2007 11. Meng T, Zhong Z, Meng L: Impact of spinal anesthesia vs. general anesthesia on perioperative outcome in lumbar spine surgery: A systematic review and meta analysis of randomised, controlled trials. Anaesthesia 72:391–401, 2017 12. Sadrolsadat SH, Mahdavi AR, Moharari RS, Khajavi MR, Khashayar P, Najafi A, Amirjamshidi A: A prospective randomized trial comparing the technique of spinal and general anesthesia for lumbar disk surgery: A study of 100 cases. Surg Neurol 71:60–65, 2009 13. Saraswat V: Effects of anaesthesia techniques and drugs on pulmonary function. Indian J Anaesth 59(9):557–564, 2015 14. Scot