Effect of epidural anesthesia and analgesia on perioperative outcome: a randomized, controlled Veterans Affairs cooperative study

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that epidural anesthesia and postoperative epidural analgesia decrease the incidence of death and major complications during and after four types of intraabdominal surgical procedures. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Even though many beneficial aspects of epidural anesthesia have been reported, clinical trials of epidural anesthesia for outcome of surgical patients have shown conflicting results. METHODS: The authors studied 1,021 patients who required anesthesia for one of the intraabdominal aortic, gastric, biliary, or colon operations. They were assigned randomly to receive either general anesthesia and postoperative analgesia with parenteral opioids (group 1) or epidural plus light general anesthesia and postoperative epidural morphine (group 2). The patients were monitored for death and major complications during and for 30 days after surgery, as well as for postoperative pain, time of ambulation, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Overall, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death and major complications between the two groups. For abdominal aortic surgical patients, unlike the other three types of surgical patients, the overall incidence of death and major complications was significantly lower in group 2 patients (22%) than in group 1 patients (37%), stemming from differences in the incidence of new myocardial infarction, stroke, and respiratory failure between the two groups. Overall, group 2 patients received significantly less analgesic medication but had better pain relief than group 1 patients. In group 2 aortic patients, endotracheal intubation time was 13 hours shorter and surgical intensive care stay was 3.5 hours shorter. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of anesthetic and postoperative analgesic techniques on perioperative outcome varies with the type of operation performed. Overall, epidural analgesia provides better postoperative pain relief. Epidural anesthesia and epidural analgesia improve the overall outcome and shorten the intubation time and intensive care stay in patients undergoing abdominal aortic operations.     

Epidural anesthesia as an adjunct to retroperitoneal aortic surgery

Recent developments in vascular surgery suggest that the retroperitoneal approach to the aorta and the use of epidural anesthesia for lower limb revascularization are associated with decreased morbidity and shorter hospital stays. By combining these principles, we sought to determine if retroperitoneal aortic surgery could be performed under epidural anesthesia and if this might be advantageous. Over a 16-month period, 57 patients underwent aortic surgery via the retroperitoneal (n = 33) or transperitoneal (n = 24) approach. In the former, epidural anesthesia was employed in 10 patients, general anesthesia in 3, and combined epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia in the remaining 20. In the transperitoneal group, general anesthesia was employed in 21 patients and combined epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia in 3. Both groups were similar in age and gender, but risk factors were predominant in the retroperitoneal group. With the exception of one death due to aspiration, there were no significant differences between the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal groups with respect to overall morbidity, pulmonary complications, and length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital. Despite these findings, we favor the combination of epidural and general anesthesia for retroperitoneal aortic surgery. Morbidity was significantly decreased (p less than 0.05) in low-risk retroperitoneal patients when combined epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia were employed.     

Combined general-epidural anesthesia compared to general anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of morbidity and mortality and analgesic efficacy in thoracoabdominal surgery

OBJETIVES: We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to compare combined general-epidural anesthesia, followed by postoperative epidural analgesia, and general anesthesia followed by postoperative parenteral analgesia without epidural analgesia in patients undergoing thoracoabdominal surgery. Outcome measures considered were mortality, length of stay in hospital and in the intensive care unit, analgesia, and morbidity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a systematic search of online databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry and the metaRegister of clinical trials at http://www.controlled-trials.com/mrct/ mrct info es.asp). We also hand-searched the literature. Authors were contacted when deemed necessary. RESULTS: A total of 30 trials (4294 patients) were analyzed. Combined anesthesia showed significant advantages in relation to 2 variables: respiratory failure (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.87) and analgesia on the first day after surgery (weighted mean difference, -6.91 95% CI, -9.46 to -4.36). No significant differences were found in the other variables. CONCLUSIONS: Combined anesthesia provides better analgesia and is associated with fewer cases of postoperative respiratory failure. No significant differences were found in mortality, length of stay in hospital, or other morbidity variables.     

Thoracic epidural analgesia versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for the treatment of rib fracture pain after motor vehicle crash.

BACKGROUND: Pain from rib fracture pain may affect pulmonary function, morbidity, and length of intensive care unit stay. Previous trials have varied epidural technique within the study and have used several outcome variables. METHODS: The charts of patients who sustained rib fractures after a motor vehicle crash between January 1, 1994, and June 30, 1997, were reviewed. Data were collected from 64 patients who had three or more rib fractures and initiation of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with morphine or thoracic epidural analgesia with bupivacaine and fentanyl within 24 hours of admission. RESULTS: Injury Severity Score and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores were not significantly different between groups. Patients in the epidural group had significantly more rib fractures and were significantly older. Patients who received epidural analgesia had significantly lower pain scores at all times. There were no differences in the lengths of intensive care unit or hospital stays, or the incidence of pulmonary complications or organ failure between groups. CONCLUSION: Thoracic epidural analgesia with bupivacaine and fentanyl provided superior analgesia than intravenous patient-controlled analgesia morphine.     

Local anesthesia for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES: This study reports the results of a prospective continuous cohort of patients treated for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with a unified anesthetic strategy based on the use of local anesthesia (LA) in all patients, while reserving regional (RA) or general anesthesia (GA) only for those with predefined individually or surgically specific indications. METHODS: All patients treated by EVAR for an elective aortic abdominal aneurysm (AAA) between April 1998 and December 2003 were included. The strategy of treatment generated three cohorts of patients (LA, RA, or GA). Primary outcome included all-cause mortality, nonfatal cardiac morbidity, respiratory complications, and renal failure. Secondary outcome measures included conversion to general anesthesia, use of analgesics, and time-related outcomes (operating time, length of stay in intensive care unit and hospital, time required to resume oral intake, and time to ambulation). RESULTS: A total of 239 patients underwent EVAR: 170 LA, 31 RA, and 38 GA. Overall mortality was one patient (0.4%). LA was associated with a lower incidence of complications compared with GA (P < .001). In the LA group, two patients had to be converted to GA, one because of a dissection and one because of anxiety. In 13% of the patients in the LA group, additional intravenous sedation or analgesia was required. Operating time and length of stay in intensive care was shorter in the LA and RA groups than in the GA group (P < .001). Length of stay in hospital and time to ambulation and regular diet was shorter in the LA group compared with the RA and GA groups (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A strategy based on the preferential use of LA for EVAR restricting RA or GA only to those with predefined contraindications is feasible and appears to be well tolerated.     

Perioperative epidural analgesia and outcome after major abdominal surgery in high-risk patients

In a primary analysis of a large recently completed randomized trial in 915 high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, we found no difference in outcome between patients receiving perioperative epidural analgesia and those receiving IV opioids, apart from the incidence of respiratory failure. Therefore, we performed a selected number of predetermined subgroup analyses to identify specific types of patients who may have derived benefit from epidural analgesia. We found no difference in outcome between epidural and control groups in subgroups at increased risk of respiratory or cardiac complications or undergoing aortic surgery, nor in a subgroup with failed epidural block (all P > 0.05). There was a small reduction in the duration of postoperative ventilation (geometric mean [SD]: control group, 0.3 [6.5] h, versus epidural group, 0.2 [4.8] h; P = 0.048). No differences were found in length of stay in intensive care or in the hospital. There was no relationship between frequency of use of epidural analgesia in routine practice outside the trial and benefit from epidural analgesia in the trial. We found no evidence that perioperative epidural analgesia significantly influences major morbidity or mortality after major abdominal surgery.     

A comparison of epidural and non-epidural anesthesia and analgesia in total hip or knee arthroplasty patients.

This retrospective study explores a number of variables encountered with the use of either epidural or non-epidural anesthesia and analgesia. Postoperative mobility, amount of narcotic used, incidence of blood transfusion, length of stay, and presence of urinary retention, pruritus, nausea and vomiting, or respiratory depression were compared in a group of 101 consecutive patients scheduled for total hip or knee arthroplasty. Fifty-two patients received epidural anesthesia and analgesia; the remaining 49 received non-epidural anesthesia, followed by standard IM/IV postoperative analgesia. Epidural patients required significantly less narcotic than the non-epidural group. There were significantly fewer blood transfusions in the epidural group; however, epidural patients had significantly increased incidence of urinary retention and pruritus. The use of epidural anesthesia and analgesia for total hip and knee arthroplasty patients has definite merit, but is most safely administered in a monitored, skilled nursing unit.     

Use of paravertebral block anesthesia in the surgical management of breast cancer: experience in 156 cases.

OBJECTIVE: To assess safety and efficacy of the regional anesthetic technique paravertebral block for operative treatment of breast cancer, and to compare postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing breast surgery using paravertebral block and general anesthesia. BACKGROUND: General anesthesia is currently the standard technique used for surgical treatment of breast cancer. Increasing hospital costs have focused attention on reducing the length of hospital stay for these patients. However, the side effects and complications of general anesthesia preclude ambulatory surgery for most patients undergoing breast surgery. In April 1994, the authors initiated the use of paravertebral block anesthesia for patients undergoing primary breast cancer surgery. A review of our early experience revealed that this regional anesthetic technique enables effective anesthesia for operative procedures of the breast and axilla, reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting, and provides prolonged postoperative sensory block that minimizes narcotic requirements. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 145 consecutive patients undergoing 156 breast cancer operations using paravertebral block and 100 patients undergoing general anesthesia during a 2-year period was performed. Anesthetic effectiveness and complications, inpatient experience with postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, and length of stay were measured. RESULTS: Surgery was successfully completed in 85% of the cases attempted by using paravertebral block alone, and in 91% of the cases, surgery was completed by using paravertebral block supplemented with local anesthetic. There was a 2.6% incidence of complications associated with block placement. Twenty percent of patients in the paravertebral group required medication for nausea and vomiting during their hospital stay compared with 39% in the general anesthesia group. Narcotic analgesia was required in 98% of general anesthesia patients, as opposed to 25% of patients undergoing paravertebral block. Ninety-six percent of patients having paravertebral block anesthesia were discharged within the day of surgery, compared with 76% of patients who had a general anesthetic. CONCLUSIONS: Paravertebral block can be used to perform major operations for breast cancer with minimal complications and a low rate of conversion to general anesthesia. Paravertebral block markedly improves the quality of recovery after breast cancer surgery and provides the patient with the option of ambulatory discharge.     

Use of thoracic epidural anaesthesia for thoracic surgery and its effect on pulmonary function

Pulmonary complications following thoracic surgery significantly contribute to peri-operative morbidity and mortality. This chapter discusses some pathophysiological aspects of thoracic surgery, the effects of epidural anaesthesia on pulmonary function and its implications for use of thoracic epidural anaesthesia after thoracic surgery. A favourable effect of epidural anaesthesia on incidence of pulmonary morbidity was recently demonstrated in a meta-analysis involving a broad spectrum of surgical procedures. There is less evidence that the use of thoracic epidural anaesthesia techniques is associated with fewer respiratory complications in patients undergoing thoracotomy. However, thoracic epidural anaesthesia provides excellent analgesia after thoracotomy, particularly if local anaesthetics are combined with opioids. In addition, decreased length of stay on an intensive care unit and reduced hospital stay could be demonstrated if thoracic epidural anaesthesia was used in cardiac or thoracic surgical patients.     

Clinical outcomes after carotid endarterectomy: comparison of the use of regional and general anesthetics

OBJECT: The authors analyzed their series of carotid endarterectomies (CEAs), which were performed after administration of either a general or regional anesthetic, to determine whether the choice of anesthetic affected patients' clinical outcomes and length of hospital stay. METHODS: A series of 803 consecutive CEAs performed between July 1990 and February 1999 was reviewed. Cases were analyzed for patient demographics, comorbid medical states, and perioperative complications. Contingency-table statistical analysis was used to compare the incidence of comorbid medical states and perioperative complications between patients who underwent CEA in which either a regional or general anesthetic was used. Student's t-test was used to compare the length of hospital stay and mean patient age. A regional anesthetic was used for 632 CEAs, and a general anesthetic was used for 171 operations. There were no statistically significant intergroup differences in demographics or comorbid medical states. The incidence of perioperative stroke and death did not differ significantly between the regional (2.7%) and the general anesthetic groups (2.3%). However, the incidence of nonneurological, nonfatal complications was significantly less in the regional anesthetic (1.6%) than in the general anesthetic group (14.6%, p<0.0001). Patients undergoing CEA in which a regional anesthetic was used had a significantly lower incidence of cardiopulmonary complications (myocardial infarction and postoperative intubation), cervical complications (neck hematomas and cranial nerve injuries), and urological complications (urinary retention) than patients who underwent surgery after receiving a general anesthetic. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing CEA in which a regional anesthetic was used had significantly fewer nonneurological, nonfatal complications, particularly cardiopulmonary complications, than similar patients surgically treated after induction of general anesthesia.     

Impact of anesthesia technique on the incidence of major complications after open aortic abdominal surgery: a cohort study

Study ObjectiveTo determine the risk factors of perioperative complications and the impact of intrathecal morphine (ITM) in major vascular surgery.DesignRetrospective analysis of a prospective cohort.SettingsOperating room, intensive care unit, and Postanesthesia Care Unit of a university hospital.MeasurementsData from 595 consecutive patients who underwent open abdominal aortic surgery between January 1997 and December 2011 were reviewed. Data were stratified into three groups based on the analgesia technique delivered: systemic analgesia (Goup SA), thoracic epidural analgesia (Group TEA), and intrathecal morphine (Group ITM). Preoperative patient characteristics, perioperative anesthetic and medical interventions, and major nonsurgical complications were recorded.Main ResultsPatients managed with ITM (n=248) and those given thoracic epidural analgesia (n=70) required lower doses of intravenous (IV) sufentanil intraoperatively and were extubated sooner than those who received systemic analgesia (n=270). Total inhospital mortality was 2.9%, and 24.4% of patients experienced at least one major complication during their hospital stay. Intrathecal morphine was associated with a lower risk of postoperative morbidity (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.28 - 0.89), particularly pulmonary complications (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 - 0.93) and renal dysfunction (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29 - 0.97). Other predictors of nonsurgical complications were ASA physical status 3 and 4 (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.07 - 3.52), preoperative renal dysfunction (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.01 - 2.58), prolonged surgical time (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.16 - 2.78), and the need for blood transfusion (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.05 - 2.99).ConclusionsThis single-center study showed a decreased risk of major nonsurgical complications in patients who received neuraxial analgesia after abdominal aortic surgery.     

Thoracic epidural versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia after cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial on length of hospital stay and patient-perceived quality of recovery

BACKGROUND: Perioperative thoracic epidural analgesia reduces stress response and pain scores and may improve outcome after cardiac surgery. This prospective, randomized trial was designed to compare the effectiveness of patient-controlled thoracic epidural analgesia with patient-controlled analgesia with intravenous morphine on postoperative hospital length of stay and patients' perception of their quality of recovery after cardiac surgery. METHODS: One hundred thirteen patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery were randomly assigned to receive either combined thoracic epidural analgesia and general anesthesia followed by patient-controlled thoracic epidural analgesia or general anesthesia followed by to patient-controlled analgesia with intravenous morphine. Postoperative length of stay, time to eligibility for hospital discharge, pain and sedation scores, degree of ambulation, lung volumes, and organ morbidities were evaluated. A validated quality of recovery score was used to measure postoperative health status. RESULTS: Length of stay and time to eligibility for hospital discharge were similar between the groups. Study groups differed neither in postoperative global quality of recovery score nor in five dimensions of quality of recovery score. Time to extubation was shorter (P < 0.001) and consumption of anesthetics was lower in the patient-controlled thoracic epidural analgesia group. Pain relief, degree of sedation, ambulation, and lung volumes were similar between the study groups. There was a trend for lower incidences of pneumonia (P = 0.085) and confusion (P = 0.10) in the patient-controlled thoracic epidural analgesia group, whereas cardiac, renal, and neurologic outcomes were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In elective cardiac surgery, thoracic epidural analgesia combined with general anesthesia followed by patient-controlled thoracic epidural analgesia offers no major advantage with respect to hospital length of stay, quality of recovery, or morbidity when compared with general anesthesia alone followed by to patient-controlled analgesia with intravenous morphine.     

Epidural analgesia in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease undergoing transperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysmorraphy--a multi-institutional analysis

INTRODUCTION: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are more likely to develop pulmonary morbidity following major abdominal surgery. The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of epidural analgesia in patients with COPD who underwent elective transperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. METHODS: During a 7-year period, all patients diagnosed with COPD undergoing elective AAA repair (n=425) from three hospitals were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were an FEV(1)/FVC ratio <75% and/or a PaCO(2)>45 mmHg. Clinical outcomes were compared between those who received epidural analgesia (epidural group) and those who did not (control group). Primary endpoints measured were duration of intubation, ICU stay, hospital days, and pulmonary complications. RESULTS: Strict inclusion criteria were met by 131 patients, which included 86 patients in the epidural group and 45 patients in the control group. When comparing the epidural vs. control group, the mean AAA size was 6.3+/-0.9 cm vs. 6.0+/-1.5 cm (NS), FEV(1) was 57.2+/-24.7% vs. 49.0+/-10.3% (NS), and the mean FEV(1)/FVC ratio was 52.0+/-11.4% vs. 50.6+/-6.7% (NS), respectively. The epidural group had a significantly lower incidence of post-operative ventilator dependency and ICU stay (p<0.05), as well as a decreased trend in pulmonary complications when compared to the control group. The overall hospital stay remained similar between the two groups. The relative risk of developing a pulmonary complication in the absence of epidural analgesia was 2.3. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative epidural analgesia is beneficial in patients with COPD undergoing AAA repair by reducing both the post-operative ventilator duration and ICU stay. Epidural analgesia should be considered in all COPD patients undergoing elective transperitoneal AAA repair.     

Combined Lumbar Spinal and Thoracic High-Epidural Regional Anesthesia as an Alternative to General Anesthesia for High-Risk Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal and Colorectal Surgery

Objective  A prospective study was undertaken to review the use of combined lumbar spinal and thoracic high-epidural regional anesthesia in high-risk patients who underwent gastrointestinal/colorectal surgery from 2004 to 2006. Methods  Twelve high-risk patients underwent 13 gastrointestinal/colorectal surgical procedures, using a regional anesthetic technique, which consisted of a thoracic epidural and lumbar subarachnoid block. All patients were classified as high risk based on anesthetic assessment (American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score 3 or 4). Results  Six (46.2%) of the patients were men, and the overall median age was 86 years. Ten (76.9%) patients presented as emergencies, whereas only three (23.1%) patients underwent elective procedures. All patients subjectively rated their postoperative pain relief as effective. The 30-day mortality was 2 (15.4%); however, both of these patients refused initial treatment. Only one (7.7%) patient required delayed ITU admission for respiratory support (CPAP). None of the patients required intubation at any stage. There were two (15.4%) minor and two (15.4%) major early complications and only one (7.7%) delayed complication to date. Median length of stay was 7 days. Two (15.4%) patients had delayed discharge dates, for social reasons. Discussion  These patients demonstrated early postoperative recovery, with effective analgesia, no requirements for intubation, and lower morbidity and mortality rates than similar studies of high-risk patients who underwent procedures using general anesthesia. Using this technique, patients were managed appropriately in HDU and the surgical ward, without affecting their overall length of hospital stay. Conclusions  This study supports the role of regional anesthetic techniques, combined with targeted, minimally invasive surgery—particularly for the management of high-risk patients presenting in the emergency setting.     

Intrathecal and epidural anesthesia and analgesia for cardiac surgery

Adequate postoperative analgesia prevents unnecessary patient discomfort. It may also decrease morbidity, postoperative hospital length of stay and, thus, cost. Achieving optimal pain relief after cardiac surgery is often difficult. Many techniques are available, and all have specific advantages and disadvantages. Intrathecal and epidural techniques clearly produce reliable analgesia in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Additional potential benefits include stress response attenuation and thoracic cardiac sympathectomy. The quality of analgesia obtained with thoracic epidural anesthetic techniques is sufficient to allow cardiac surgery to be performed in awake patients without general endotracheal anesthesia. However, applying regional anesthetic techniques to patients undergoing cardiac surgery is not without risk. Side effects of local anesthetics (hypotension) and opioids (pruritus, nausea/vomiting, urinary retention, and respiratory depression), when used in this manner, may complicate perioperative management. Increased risk of hematoma formation in this scenario has generated much of lively debate regarding the acceptable risk-benefit ratio of applying regional anesthetic techniques to patients undergoing cardiac surgery.     

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement under thoracic epidural anesthesia in a conscious patient: case report

Cardiopulmonary bypass and full median sternotomy have been recognized as major morbidity factors in cardiac surgery. Additional morbidity factors are general anesthesia and endotracheal intubation. Over the past several years high-thoracic epidural anesthesia (hTEA) has emerged as a potentially beneficial supplement to general anesthesia in the care of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. We report a case of ministernotomy aortic valve replacement performed with hTEA. The procedure was not converted to general anesthesia or to a conventional operation and was performed without adverse incidents. The patient was discharged from the hospital on the 2nd postoperative day. There were no complications within 30 days after surgery. This case demonstrates that thoracic epidural anesthesia without endotracheal intubation used for aortic valve replacement performed through ministernotomy is feasible. Further experience is necessary to determine the safety of this method and the effect on outcome.     

Postoperative epidural analgesia following abdominal aortic surgery: Do the benefits justify the costs?

This study was undertaken to compare postoperative epidural analgesia (PEA) with patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) regarding complications, particularly pulmonary, death, intensive care unit and hospital stay, and hospital and physician charges. The elective consecutive infrarenal abdominal aortic procedures performed by two vascular surgeons over a 1 year period were retrospectively analyzed. Although nonrandomized, of the 80 patients reviewed, 40 received PEA and 40 received PCA. The following demographic data were obtained: age, sex, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, coronary artery disease, prior coronary revascularization, stroke, renal insufficiency, smoking, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Epidural catheters were placed preoperatively and maintained for an average of 4 days postoperatively. All patients underwent routine aortic reconstruction via midline transperitoneal incisions. The demographics were similar in both groups. Likewise, surgical intensive care unit stay and complications were similar in both groups. The average length of stay in patients receiving PEA was 7.59 days, compared with 6.68 days for the PCA group. Following discharge from the hospital, no additional complications were encountered and no readmissions required during a 4-week follow-up. Average charge (hospital and physician) per patient for PEA was $2489.00 compared with $443.00 for patients receiving PCA (no physician charges generated for PCA). The results do not support the routine use of PEA following abdominal aortic operations. Savings are more than $2000.00 per patient for PCA compared with PEA. The author wishes to thank Steven A. Hutchinson, MD, for allowing his patient data to be included in this study.     

Thoracic epidural anesthesia improves outcome after breast surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The authors' objective was to compare the outcomes, including the incidence of nausea and vomiting and the time until discharge to home, of patients undergoing general anesthesia and thoracic epidural anesthesia for oncologic breast procedures. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: General anesthesia is the traditional anesthetic technique used in oncologic breast procedures. In March 1993, the authors initiated the use of high thoracic epidural anesthesia for patients undergoing oncologic breast surgery and reconstructive procedures. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was undertaken of 136 operations performed by one surgeon (T.J.E.) at Brigham and Women's Hospital. A chi square analysis was used to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing general anesthesia and thoracic epidural anesthesia. RESULTS: Compared with general anesthesia, thoracic epidural anesthesia was associated with a statistically significant earlier hospital discharge (p = 0.01). For quadrantectomy/axillary node dissection procedures, 20 of 39 patients (51%) having thoracic epidural anesthesia were discharged on the operative day versus 7 of 32 patients (22%) in the general anesthesia group. Furthermore, 8 of 39 patients (20%) in the thoracic epidural group experienced nausea and/or vomiting during their hospital stay versus 18 of 32 patients (56%) in the general anesthesia group (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Thoracic epidural anesthesia is a safe technique not associated with neurologic or respiratory complications. The use of thoracic epidural anesthesia for breast surgery could improve patients recovery and reduce the cost of these procedures.     

Epidural anesthesia and analgesia: effects on recovery from cardiac surgery

OBJECTIVE: To measure predefined clinical effects resulting from the use of epidural anesthesia and analgesia during and after cardiac surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, nonblinded clinical trial. SETTING: Single academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. INTERVENTIONS: Sixty participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 study groups: (1) A control group received general anesthesia during surgery and intravenous opiate analgesia after surgery. (2) A treatment group received thoracic epidural anesthesia combined with general anesthesia during surgery and epidural analgesia for the first 24 postoperative hours. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary study measurements were planned to evaluate recovery from surgery and included time to tracheal extubation, duration of postoperative intensive care unit stay, duration of postoperative hospitalization, pain control, urinary free cortisol, cardiopulmonary complication rate, and total hospital charges. No statistically significant differences between the 2 study groups were found in these main measurements. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical course of elective cardiac surgical patients who receive epidural anesthesia during surgery and epidural analgesia after surgery is comparable to that of patients managed with general anesthesia alone during surgery followed by parenteral opiate analgesia after surgery.     

Early extubation after single-lung transplantation: analysis of the first 106 cases

OBJECTIVE: To determine if a modern anesthetic approach permits extubation immediately after surgery for single-lung transplantation. DESIGN: A retrospective study of all patients undergoing single-lung transplantation from June 1993 to December 1999 in Denmark. SETTING: Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University hospital. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred six consecutive patients scheduled for single-lung transplantation. INTERVENTIONS: From July 1997, the anesthetic approach was changed to facilitate early extubation. The changes included epidural analgesia and short-acting anesthetic drugs. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred six patients were anesthetized for single-lung transplantation. The first 33 patients were moved to the intensive care unit for postoperative mechanical ventilation. After the change of anesthesia technique, 53 of 73 patients were extubated in the operating room. Eleven patients needed reintubation within the first 24 hours because of respiratory insufficiency, pulmonary edema, hemorrhage, or pneumothorax. The need for reintubation increased the length of stay in the intensive care unit by 1 day from 2 to 3 days (NS). The possibility of early extubation or the need for reintubation was not related to age, weight, sex, preoperative condition, mode of transport of the graft, duration of graft ischemia, or side of transplantation. CONCLUSION: This study has shown that it is possible to extubate patients in the operating room immediately after single-lung transplantation in the majority of cases.