Zheng Bin, Yu Panfeng, Liang Yan, Liu Haiying
Spine Surgery Department, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Pain Res Manag. 2024 Dec 6;2024:8022643. doi: 10.1155/prm/8022643. eCollection 2024.
The objective of this study was to systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of local anesthesia, general anesthesia, and epidural anesthesia in percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and OVID databases for all relevant studies. All statistical analysis was performed using STATA 17.0. Fourteen studies were finally included, comprising 7 randomized controlled trials and 7 retrospective studies. The total number of subjects across these studies was 1655, with 316 undergoing general anesthesia, 789 undergoing local anesthesia, and 550 undergoing epidural anesthesia. The meta-analysis of pairwise comparisons suggests that there are no differences among epidural, general anesthesia, and local anesthesia in terms of postoperative VAS, ODI, and surgery time. Regarding complications, general anesthesia has a higher complication rate compared with local anesthesia, but there are no differences between epidural and general anesthesia or between epidural and local anesthesia. In terms of anesthesia satisfaction, both general and epidural anesthesia have higher satisfaction rates compared with local anesthesia, with no significant difference between general and epidural anesthesia. The ranking of the best probabilities shows that epidural anesthesia has the lowest postoperative VAS and highest anesthesia satisfaction. General anesthesia has the lowest ODI scores. Local anesthesia has the fewest complications and operative time. Local anesthesia, general anesthesia, and epidural anesthesia are all safe and effective methods for PELD. Local anesthesia has advantages in complications and operation time. Epidural anesthesia is most advantageous in anesthesia satisfaction and postoperative VAS scores. General anesthesia is most advantageous in postoperative ODI. In the future, more multicenter RCTs are needed to further compare the safety and effectiveness of different anesthesia methods in PELD.
本研究的目的是系统评价局部麻醉、全身麻醉和硬膜外麻醉在经皮内镜下腰椎间盘切除术(PELD)中的安全性和有效性。我们在PubMed、EMBASE和OVID数据库中检索了所有相关研究。所有统计分析均使用STATA 17.0进行。最终纳入14项研究,包括7项随机对照试验和7项回顾性研究。这些研究的受试者总数为1655例,其中316例接受全身麻醉,789例接受局部麻醉,550例接受硬膜外麻醉。两两比较的荟萃分析表明,硬膜外麻醉、全身麻醉和局部麻醉在术后视觉模拟评分(VAS)、腰椎间盘疾病功能障碍指数(ODI)和手术时间方面没有差异。关于并发症,全身麻醉的并发症发生率高于局部麻醉,但硬膜外麻醉与全身麻醉之间或硬膜外麻醉与局部麻醉之间没有差异。在麻醉满意度方面,全身麻醉和硬膜外麻醉的满意度均高于局部麻醉,全身麻醉和硬膜外麻醉之间没有显著差异。最佳概率排名显示,硬膜外麻醉术后VAS最低,麻醉满意度最高。全身麻醉的ODI评分最低。局部麻醉的并发症和手术时间最少。局部麻醉、全身麻醉和硬膜外麻醉都是PELD安全有效的方法。局部麻醉在并发症和手术时间方面具有优势。硬膜外麻醉在麻醉满意度和术后VAS评分方面最具优势。全身麻醉在术后ODI方面最具优势。未来,需要更多的多中心随机对照试验来进一步比较不同麻醉方法在PELD中的安全性和有效性。