Karim Habib Md R, Khan Imran A, Ayub Arshad, Ahmed Ghazal
Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Guwahati, Guwahati, IND.
Community Medicine, Baba Raghav Das Medical College, Gorakhpur, IND.
Cureus. 2024 Sep 6;16(9):e68792. doi: 10.7759/cureus.68792. eCollection 2024 Sep.
Segmental thoracic spinal anesthesia (STSA) has been described primarily as case reports for performing upper abdominal and thoracic surgeries in significant respiratory comorbid patients. A few comparative studies have recently evaluated the technique as an advantageous alternative to general anesthesia (GA). However, there is no systematic evaluation and comparison of the techniques. The present systematic review evaluated the hemodynamic, comfort, and satisfaction of patients undergoing abdominal and thoracic surgeries under STSA and GA. PubMed, CENTRAL, Google Scholar Advanced, and citation tracking were performed to find suitable articles that compared STSA and GA. The primary objective-related data were hypotension and bradycardia. The secondary objective-related data in the context of postoperative nausea vomiting (PONV), pain, rescue analgesics, sedation requirement, satisfaction, and comfort were assessed. Meta-analysis was performed for dichotomous data on hypotension, bradycardia, and PONV; odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported. Data of 394 patients from six studies were evaluated. Patients undergoing upper abdominal and breast surgeries under STSA had significantly higher odds of hypotension (Fixed-Effect Model OR 12.23, 95% CI 2.81-53.28; I2 =0%, and the Random Effects Model OR 12.01, 95% CI 2.75-52.52; I2 =0%) and bradycardia (Fixed-Effect Model OR 10.95, 95% CI 2.94-40.74, I2 =0%, and the Random Effects Model OR 9.97, 95% CI 2.61-38.08; I2 =0%) but lower odds of PONV (Fixed-Effect Model OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.13-0.43; I2 =0%, and the Random Effects Model OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.13-0.45; I2 =0%). Most of the patients undergoing STSA were given intravenous sedation to overcome anxiety and discomfort. Overall, patient satisfaction was on par with GA. However, few surgeons were unenthusiastic about the technique while performing axillary clearances due to bothering twitches from cautery. STSA led to early post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge and provided better pain control, lowering the need for rescue analgesics and opioid consumption in the first 24-hour postoperative period. STSA is associated with very high odds of hypotension and bradycardia as compared to GA. On the other hand, STSA demonstrated superior pain control, reduced opioid requirements, shorter PACU stays, and significantly reduced risk of PONV. Nevertheless, STSA patients mostly require sedation to make the patient comfortable.
节段性胸椎脊髓麻醉(STSA)主要是以病例报告的形式描述用于患有严重呼吸合并症的患者进行上腹部和胸部手术。最近有一些比较研究评估了该技术作为全身麻醉(GA)的一种有利替代方案。然而,对于这些技术并没有系统的评估和比较。本系统评价评估了接受STSA和GA的腹部和胸部手术患者的血流动力学、舒适度和满意度。通过检索PubMed、CENTRAL、谷歌学术高级版以及进行引文追踪来寻找比较STSA和GA的合适文章。与主要目标相关的数据是低血压和心动过缓。评估了与次要目标相关的数据,包括术后恶心呕吐(PONV)、疼痛、急救镇痛药、镇静需求、满意度和舒适度。对关于低血压、心动过缓和PONV的二分数据进行了荟萃分析;报告了比值比(OR)和95%置信区间(CI)。对来自六项研究的394例患者的数据进行了评估。接受STSA的上腹部和乳房手术患者发生低血压(固定效应模型OR 12.23,95%CI 2.81 - 53.28;I² = 0%,随机效应模型OR 12.01,95%CI 2.75 - 52.52;I² = 0%)和心动过缓(固定效应模型OR 10.95,95%CI 2.94 - 40.74,I² = 0%,随机效应模型OR 9.97,95%CI 2.61 - 38.08;I² = 0%)的几率显著更高,但发生PONV的几率更低(固定效应模型OR 0.24,95%CI 0.13 - 0.43;I² = 0%,随机效应模型OR 0.24,95%CI 0.13 - 0.45;I² = 0%)。大多数接受STSA的患者给予了静脉镇静以克服焦虑和不适。总体而言,患者满意度与GA相当。然而,少数外科医生在进行腋窝清扫时对该技术不太热衷,因为电灼引起的抽搐令人困扰。STSA导致患者在麻醉后护理单元(PACU)提前出院,并提供了更好的疼痛控制,降低了术后24小时内急救镇痛药的需求和阿片类药物的消耗量。与GA相比,STSA发生低血压和心动过缓的几率非常高。另一方面,STSA显示出更好的疼痛控制、减少了阿片类药物需求、缩短了PACU停留时间,并显著降低了PONV的风险。尽管如此,STSA患者大多需要镇静以使患者舒适。