Pöpping Daniel M, Gogarten Wiebke
Klinik für Anästhesiologie, operative Intensivmedizin und Schmerztherapie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus, Gebäude A1, 48149, Münster, Deutschland.
Anaesthesiologie. 2025 Apr 7. doi: 10.1007/s00101-025-01528-3.
With the rise of minimally invasive and robot-assisted surgical techniques, the role of epidural anesthesia (EA) in modern practice necessitates careful re-evaluation. This review explores the relevance of EA in thoracic and abdominal surgery, examining its practical applications, residual indications and considerations for its use. Additionally, alternative pain management strategies, including systemic analgesia, regional nerve blocks and novel perioperative approaches, are assessed for advantages and limitations compared to EA.Traditionally the gold standard for perioperative pain control in thoracic and abdominal procedures, EA provides superior analgesia, reduced pulmonary complications and promotes early postoperative mobilization; however, the shift towards less invasive types of surgery has raised questions about the necessity and risk-benefit profile of EA. Complications such as hypotension, hematoma and rare neurological injuries emphasize the importance of thorough risk assessment.Emerging data show that alternative methods, such as transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks, paravertebral blocks and multimodal analgesia provide comparable efficacy in specific patient groups while often demonstrating a better safety profile. Nevertheless, EA remains essential in extensive thoracic surgery, complex abdominal resections and in patients with a high risk for severe postoperative pain or respiratory compromise. Combining EA with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols has also shown promise in improving outcomes.In conclusion, while minimally invasive surgical techniques have transformed perioperative care, EA retains a critical role in selected indications. Individualized planning of anesthesia, weighing EA against evolving alternatives and tailored to surgical and patient-specific factors, is essential. This review highlights the integration of evidence-based strategies to optimize the role of EA in contemporary surgical treatment.
随着微创和机器人辅助手术技术的兴起,硬膜外麻醉(EA)在现代医疗实践中的作用需要仔细重新评估。本综述探讨了EA在胸腹部手术中的相关性,研究其实际应用、剩余适应症以及使用时的注意事项。此外,还评估了包括全身镇痛、区域神经阻滞和新型围手术期方法在内的替代疼痛管理策略与EA相比的优缺点。
传统上,EA是胸腹部手术围手术期疼痛控制的金标准,它能提供卓越的镇痛效果,减少肺部并发症,并促进术后早期活动;然而,向侵入性较小的手术方式的转变引发了对EA必要性和风险效益的质疑。低血压、血肿和罕见的神经损伤等并发症凸显了全面风险评估的重要性。
新出现的数据表明,诸如腹横肌平面(TAP)阻滞、椎旁阻滞和多模式镇痛等替代方法在特定患者群体中具有相当的疗效,同时通常显示出更好的安全性。尽管如此,EA在广泛的胸外科手术、复杂的腹部切除术以及术后严重疼痛或呼吸功能不全风险较高的患者中仍然至关重要。将EA与术后加速康复(ERAS)方案相结合在改善预后方面也显示出前景。
总之,虽然微创外科技术改变了围手术期护理,但EA在特定适应症中仍发挥着关键作用。根据手术和患者特定因素,对麻醉进行个性化规划,权衡EA与不断发展的替代方法,这至关重要。本综述强调了整合循证策略以优化EA在当代外科治疗中的作用。