Regional Anesthesia Complications and Contraindications.

Regional anesthesia has a strong role in minimizing post-operative pain, decreasing narcotic use and PONV, and, therefore, speeding discharge times. However, as with any procedure, regional anesthesia has both benefits and risks. It is important to identify the complications and contraindications related to regional anesthesia, which patient populations are at highest risk, and how to mitigate those risks to the greatest extent possible. Overall, significant complications secondary to regional anesthesia remain low. While a variety of different regional anesthesia techniques exist, complications tend to fall within 4 broad categories: block failure, bleeding/hematoma, neurological injury, and local anesthetic toxicity.

In Patients with Heart Failure Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy, Locoregional Anesthesia is Not Associated with Decreased Mortality, Stroke, or Myocardial Infarction Compared to General Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: While existing literature reports no benefit of locoregional anesthesia (LRA) over general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA), the effect of LRA on patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) has not been explored. This study aims to assess whether the choice of anesthesia plays a role in influencing outcomes within this population. METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) files between 2005 and 2022 and the procedural targeted ACS-NSQIP database for CEA between 2011-2022, all patients receiving CEA were identified, and the subset of patients with CHF was included. Patient characteristics and 30-day outcomes were compared using χ2 or Fischer's exact test as appropriate for categorical variables and the independent t-test or Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate for continuous variables. Mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were compared between patients receiving GA and LRA using univariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3,040 patients (2,733 undergoing GA, 307 undergoing LRA) with a diagnosis of CHF undergoing CEA were identified. No difference in mortality (GA 3.1% vs. LRA 4.6%, P = 0.162), MI (GA 3.0% vs. LRA 2.3%, P = 0.478), stroke (2.4% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.805) or MACE (GA 7.4% vs. LRA 8.1%, P = 0.654) was observed. LRA patients had a significantly lower hospital stay compared to GA patients (1 day [interquartile range (IQR) 1-3] vs. 2 days [IQR 1-4], P < 0.001). Shunt was more commonly used in patients receiving GA (32.9% vs. 12.5%, P < 0.001) compared to LRA. CONCLUSIONS: While utilizing LRA compared to GA during CEA in patients with CHF is associated with a shorter hospital stay and less intraoperative shunting, the choice of anesthesia did not impact the outcomes of mortality, MI or stroke. Further research is needed to determine the effect of LRA on the outcomes of CEA among patients with different stages of heart failure.

Locoregional Anesthesia Has Lower Risks of Cardiac Complications Than General Anesthesia After Prolonged Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVES: Although general anesthesia is the primary anesthesia in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), some studies suggest locoregional anesthesia could be a feasible alternative for eligible patients. However, most evidence was from retrospective studies and was subjected to an inherent selection bias that general anesthesia is often chosen for more complex and prolonged cases. To mitigate this selection bias, this study aimed to compare 30-day outcomes of prolonged, nonemergent, intact, infrarenal EVAR in patients undergoing locoregional or general anesthesia. In addition, risk factors associated with prolonged operative time in EVAR were identified. DESIGN: Retrospective large-scale national registry study. SETTING: American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted database from 2012 to 2022. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 4,075 out of 16,438 patients (24.79%) had prolonged EVAR. Among patients with prolonged EVAR, 324 patients (7.95%) were under locoregional anesthesia. There were 3,751 patients (92.05%) under general anesthesia, and 955 of them were matched to the locoregional anesthesia cohort. INTERVENTIONS: Patients undergoing infrarenal EVAR were included. Exclusion criteria included age <18 years, emergency cases, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, and acute intraoperative conversion to open. Only cases with prolonged operative times (>157 minutes) were selected. A 1:3 propensity-score matching was used to address demographics, baseline characteristics, aneurysm diameter, distant aneurysm extent, and concomitant procedures between patients under locoregional and general anesthesia. Thirty-day postoperative outcomes were assessed. Moreover, factors associated with prolonged EVAR were identified by multivariate logistic regression. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Except for general anesthesia contraindications, patients undergoing locoregional or general anesthesia exhibited largely similar preoperative characteristics. After propensity-score matching, patients under locoregional and general anesthesia had a lower risk of myocardial infarction (0.93% v 2.83%, p = 0.04), but comparable 30-day mortality (3.72% v 2.72%, p = 0.35) and other complications. Specific concomitant procedures, aneurysm anatomy, and comorbidities associated with prolonged EVAR were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Locoregional anesthesia can be a safe and effective alternative to general anesthesia, particularly in EVAR cases with anticipated complexity and prolonged operative times, as it offers the potential benefit of reduced cardiac complications. Risk factors associated with prolonged EVAR can aid in preoperative risk stratification and inform the decision-making process regarding anesthesia choice.

Perioperative pain management with regional analgesia techniques for visceral cancer surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Regional analgesia following visceral cancer surgery might provide an advantage but evidence for best treatment options related to risk-benefit is unclear. DESIGN: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) with meta-analysis and GRADE assessment. SETTING: Postoperative pain treatment. PATIENTS: Adult patients undergoing visceral cancer surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Any kind of peripheral (PRA) or epidural analgesia (EA) with/without systemic analgesia (SA) was compared to SA with or without placebo treatment or any other regional anaesthetic techniques. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome measures were postoperative acute pain intensity at rest and during activity 24 h after surgery, the number of patients with block-related adverse events and postoperative paralytic ileus. MAIN RESULTS: 59 RCTs (4345 participants) were included. EA may reduce pain intensity at rest (mean difference (MD) -1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.35 to -0.75, low certainty evidence) and during activity 24 h after surgery (MD -1.83; 95% CI: -2.34 to -1.33, very low certainty evidence). PRA likely results in little difference in pain intensity at rest (MD -0.75; 95% CI: -1.20 to -0.31, moderate certainty evidence) and pain during activity (MD -0.93; 95% CI: -1.34 to -0.53, moderate certainty evidence) 24 h after surgery compared to SA. There may be no difference in block-related adverse events (very low certainty evidence) and development of paralytic ileus (very low certainty of evidence) between EA, respectively PRA and SA. CONCLUSIONS: Following visceral cancer surgery EA may reduce pain intensity. In contrast, PRA had only limited effects on pain intensity at rest and during activity. However, we are uncertain regarding the effect of both techniques on block-related adverse events and paralytic ileus. Further research is required focusing on regional analgesia techniques especially following laparoscopic visceral cancer surgery.

General anesthesia is not associated with dementia in older adults with osteoarthritis for hip/knee replacements, a national population-based nested case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is a prevalent neurological condition, yet the relationship between dementia and general anesthesia remains uncertain. The study aimed to explore the association between general anesthesia and dementia using a nationwide population-based database. METHODS: The study extracted data from Taiwan's national health insurance, which encompassed the records of one million insured residents. A total of 59,817 patients aged 65 years and above, diagnosed with osteoarthritis between 2002 and 2010, were included. Among these patients, 3277 individuals with an initial diagnosis of dementia between 2004 and 2013 were matched with non-dementia patients based on age, gender, and the date of osteoarthritis diagnosis. Following a 1:2 random matching, the case group included 2171 patients with dementia, while the control group consisted of 4342 patients without dementia. The data was analyzed using conditional and unconditional logistic regressions. RESULTS: No significant differences in the odds of dementia were found between individuals exposed to general and regional anesthesia during hip/knee replacement surgeries (OR = 1.11; 95%CI: 0.73-1.70), after adjusting for age, sex, and co-morbidities. Similarly, there were no significant differences in the odds of dementia based on different durations of anesthesia exposure (General: <2 h: OR = 0.91, 95%CI = 0.43-1.92; 2-4 h: OR = 1.21, 95%CI = 0.82-1.79; >4 h: OR = 0.39, 95%CI = 0.15-1.01; compared to no exposure. Regional: <2 h: OR = 1.18, 95%CI = 0.85-1.62; 2-4 h: OR = 0.9, 95%CI = 0.64-1.27; >4 h: OR = 0.55, 95%CI = 0.15-1.96; compared to no exposure). Likewise, no significant differences were observed in the odds of dementia based on the number of replacement surgeries (twice: OR = 0.74, 95%CI = 0.44-1.23, compared to once). CONCLUSION: Neither general anesthesia nor regional anesthesia in hip/knee surgery was associated with dementia. Different numbers and durations of anesthesia exposure showed no significant differences in the odds for dementia.

Vestibular Symptoms Following a Retrobulbar Block: A Case Report.

A 62-year-old male patient presented for cataract surgery under retrobulbar block anesthesia. After the regional block, the patient exhibited sudden onset and progressive symptoms of nausea, vomiting, central-type vertigo, and hearing loss. These symptoms subsided within 2 hours, and the patient was discharged after 2 days without any residual effects. This report demonstrates a combination of auditory and vertiginous symptoms after a retrobulbar block. It emphasizes continuous care and vigilance when using regional anesthesia due to the potential risks and varied complications.

Patient Satisfaction With, and Outcomes of, Ultrasound-Guided Regional Anesthesia at a Referral Hospital in Tanzania: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Regional anesthesia techniques are increasingly used in high-income countries (HICs) for both surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. However, regional anesthesia has not been utilized to the same degree in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs) due to a lack of resources and trained personnel. This study evaluates patient satisfaction with, and outcomes of, ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia for extremity surgery at Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Center (KCMC) in the Northeastern zone of Tanzania. METHODS: Study patients were ≥18 years of age; American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I, II, or III; and underwent extremity surgery under peripheral nerve block with ultrasound guidance at KCMC. After placement, blocks were assessed for effectiveness intraoperatively, as demonstrated by the need for supplemental analgesic or sedative medication or conversion to a general anesthetic. Postoperatively, patients were assessed for satisfaction with their nerve block and pain at 12 and 24 hours. Adverse events related to regional anesthesia were assessed immediately, 45 minutes after block placement, and at 12 and 24 hours postoperatively. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction at 12 hours. Secondary outcomes were block success rate and analgesia at 12 and 24 hours postoperatively. RESULTS: A convenience sample of 170 patients was included in the study, of whom 156 (95% confidence interval [CI], 87-95) were either satisfied or very satisfied with their block. Block placement was highly successful with only 8 of 170 participants (95% CI, 2.4-8.3), requiring conversion to a general anesthetic. Analgesia continued in the postoperative period, with 164 of 170 (95% CI, 93-98) patients and 145 of 170 (95% CI, 80-90) patients reporting acceptable analgesia at 12 and 24 hours, respectively. No major adverse events, such as local anesthetic toxicity, infection, bleeding, nerve injury, or pneumothorax, were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia in a resource-constrained setting was effective for extremity surgery and resulted in high patient satisfaction. No complications occurred. The use of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia shows promise for the safe and effective care of patients undergoing extremity surgery in LMICs.

Retinal artery occlusion after ophthalmic surgery under regional anaesthesia: A narrative review.

Two recent cases of central retinal artery occlusion under otherwise uncomplicated sub-Tenon's block that resulted in significant visual loss after cataract surgery prompted us to undertake a literature review of such cases. We identified 97 cases of retinal artery occlusion after ophthalmic surgery under regional anaesthesia that had no immediate signs of block-related complications. These occurred after various intraocular (87%) and extraocular (13%) operations, across a wide range of ages (19-89 years) on patients with (59%) or without (39%) known risk factors. The anaesthetic techniques included 40 retrobulbar blocks, 36 peribulbar blocks, 19 sub-Tenon's blocks, one topical anaesthetic and one unspecified local anaesthetic. Different strengths of lidocaine, bupivacaine, mepivacaine and ropivacaine, either alone or in various combinations, were used. The details of the anaesthetic techniques were often incomplete in the reports, which made comparison and analysis difficult. Only nine cases had their cause (optic nerve sheath injury) identified, while the mechanism of injury was unclear in the remaining patients. Various mechanisms were postulated; however, the cause was likely to be multifactorial due to patient, surgical and anaesthetic risk factors, especially in those with compromised retinal circulation. As there were no definite risk factors identified, no specific recommendations could be made to avoid this devastating outcome. We have provided rationales for some general considerations, which may reduce this risk, and propose anaesthetic options for ophthalmic surgery on the fellow eye if required, based both on our literature review and our personal experience.

Peripheral Regional Anesthetic Techniques in Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to investigate postoperative pain outcomes and adverse events after peripheral regional anesthesia (PRA) compared to no regional anesthesia (RA), placebo, or neuraxial anesthesia in children and adults undergoing cardiac surgery. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis with an assessment of the risk of bias (Cochrane RoB 1) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). SETTING: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PARTICIPANTS: Adults and children undergoing heart surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Any kind of PRA compared to no RA or placebo or neuraxial anesthesia. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In total, 33 RCTs (2,044 patients) were included-24 of these had a high risk of bias, and 28 were performed in adults. Compared to no RA, PRA may reduce pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery (mean difference [MD] -0.81 points, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.10; I2 = 92%; very low certainty evidence). Peripheral regional anesthesia, compared to placebo, may reduce pain intensity at rest (MD -1.36 points, 95% CI -1.59 to -1.13; I2 = 54%; very low certainty evidence) and during movement (MD -1.00 points, 95% CI -1.34 to -0.67; I² = 72%; very low certainty evidence) 24 hours after surgery. No data after pediatric cardiac surgery could be meta-analyzed due to the low number of included trials. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to no RA or placebo, PRA may reduce pain intensity at rest and during movement. However, these results should be interpreted cautiously because the certainty of evidence is only very low.

Endovascular revascularization of critical limb ischemia: the role of ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block for the procedural pain management.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block (PSNB) for pain management during endovascular treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: From November 2020 to January 2022, 111 CLTI patients that underwent endovascular procedures were prospectively enrolled in this prospective single-arm interventional study. Ultrasound-guided PSNB was used for procedural pain control. Pain intensity was evaluated throughout the procedure (baseline, 10 min after the block, pain peak, and at the end of the procedure) with the visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Forty-six patients underwent above-the-knee revascularization (ATK), 20/111 below-the-knee (BTK) revascularization, 20/111 to both ATK and BTK revascularization. In 25 cases, no endovascular option was feasible at diagnostic angiography. The PSNB was effective in 96% of patients, with no need for further pain management with a statistically significant reduction (p < 0.0001) in the mean value of the VAS from 7.86 ± 1.81 (pre-procedural) to 2.04 ± 2.20 after 10 min from the block and up to 0.74 ± 1.43 at the end of the procedure (mean time 43 min). Only 1 complication related to the popliteal sciatic nerve block was registered (a temporary foot drop, completely resolved within 48 h). The time necessary to perform the block ranged between 4 and 10 min. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided PSNB is a feasible and effective method to manage patients with rest pain and increase comfort and compliance during endovascular procedures. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: An ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block is a safe, feasible, and effective technique to manage pain during endovascular treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia, especially in frail patients with multiple comorbidities who are poor candidates for deep sedoanalgesia or general anesthesia. KEY POINTS: Endovascular treatment of CTLI may require long revascularization sessions in patients with high levels of pain at rest, which could be exacerbated during the revascularization procedure. The PSNB is routinely used for anesthesia and analgesia during foot and ankle surgery, but the experience with lower limb revascularization procedures is very limited and not included in any international guideline. Ultrasound-guided PSNB is a feasible and effective regional anesthesia technique to relieve procedural and resting pain. Because of its safety and availability, every interventional radiologist should know how to perform this type of loco-regional anesthesia.

Regional Blocks Benefit Patients Undergoing Bilateral Mastectomy with Immediate Implant-Based Reconstruction, Even After Discharge.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence that regional anesthesia reduces pain in patients undergoing mastectomy with immediate implant-based reconstruction. We sought to determine whether regional blocks reduce opioid consumption and improve post-discharge patient-reported pain in this population. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent bilateral mastectomy with immediate implant-based reconstruction with and without a regional block. We tested for differences in opioid consumption by block receipt using multivariable ordinal regression, and also assessed routinely collected patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for 10 days postoperatively and tested the association between block receipt and moderate or greater pain. RESULTS: Of 754 patients, 89% received a block. Non-block patients had an increase in the odds of requiring a higher quartile of postoperative opioids. Among block patients, the estimated probability of being in the lowest quartile of opioids required was 25%, compared with 15% for non-block patients. Odds of patient-reported moderate or greater pain after discharge was 0.54 times lower in block patients than non-block patients (p = 0.025). Block patients had a 49% risk of moderate or greater pain compared with 64% in non-block patients on postoperative day 5. There was no indication of any reason for these differences other than a causal effect of the block. CONCLUSION: Receipt of a regional block resulted in reduced opioid use and lower risk of self-reported moderate and higher pain after discharge in bilateral mastectomy with immediate implant-based reconstruction patients. Our use of PROs suggests that the analgesic effects of blocks persist after discharge, beyond the expected duration of a 'single shot' block.

Fascial plane blocks in children-Scientifically supported or not?

Since the introduction of Fascial Plane Blocks in 2007 there has been an enormous interest and application of Fascial Plane Blocks, evidenced by substantially more than 1000 PubMed items. Despite this gigantic number of publications, also including randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses in children, there is still no clear-cut insight into how much of the purported effect is in fact due to the blockade of nerve structures and how much is merely adding the well-known analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects of the plasma levels of local anesthetics that are achieved with these techniques. Furthermore, Fascial Plane Blocks appear useful only if compared to conventional multi-modal analgesia (no block or placebo) and Fascial Plane Blocks lack the potency to provide surgical anesthesia on their own and appear only to be of value when used for minor-moderate surgery. Despite the huge literature, there has so far not emerged any clinical situations where Fascial Plane Blocks have definitively been shown to be the block of choice, being decisively more effective than other established regional blocks. Lastly, Fascial Plane Blocks may appear as virtually free of complications, but case reports are emerging that point to a real risk for causing local anesthetic systemic toxicity when using Fascial Plane Blocks. This text aims to synthesize the current knowledge base regarding the Fascial Plane Blocks that are relevant to use in the pediatric context. In summary, there does currently not exist any convincing scientific evidence for the continued support for the use of Fascial Plane Blocks in children, except for the rectus sheath block and possibly also the transmuscular quadratus lumborum block.

Thoracic paravertebral nerve block combined laryngeal mask airway with preservation of spontaneous breathing can accelerate postoperative recovery.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the potential benefits of Thoracic Paravertebral Nerve Block (TPVB) coupled with Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) and the maintenance of spontaneous breathing anesthesia, in contrast to general anesthesia utilizing double-lumen endobronchial intubation, on promoting recovery following thoracoscopic surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was carried out involving sixty patients set for Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (VATS) at the Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University from February 2021 to January 2022. Patients were randomized to either the TPVB and LMA with spontaneous breathing anesthesia group (non-intubation group, NI group) or the general anesthesia with double-lumen endobronchial intubation group (Intubation group, I group). The primary outcome measured was the duration of hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included early postoperative rehabilitation indicators, postoperative complications, Visual Analogue Score (VAS), and inflammatory response markers. RESULTS: Patients in the NI group experienced significantly shorter hospital stays than those in the I group (p < 0.05). Early postoperative recovery, assessed by metrics including the first exhaust time, food intake time, first ambulation time, and duration of chest-tube placement, was superior in the NI group (p < 0.05). Postoperative complications such as nausea and vomiting, pulmonary infection, atelectasis, sore throat, and hoarseness, along with cortisol and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels at the end of the operation and 24 h post-operation, and VAS values within the first 12 h post-operation, were significantly lower in the NI group (p < 0.05). However, blood loss, operation time, and VAS values at 24 h and 48 h post-surgery showed no significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that TPVB, in conjunction with LMA and spontaneous breathing anesthesia, may expedite postoperative recovery in patients undergoing VATS.

Motor-sparing peripheral nerve blocks for hip and knee surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize the recent literature describing and comparing novel motor-sparing peripheral nerve block techniques for hip and knee surgery. This topic is relevant because the number of patients undergoing same day discharge after hip and knee surgery is increasing. Preserving lower extremity muscle function is essential to facilitate early physical therapy for these patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Distal peripheral nerve blocks may allow for preserved quadriceps motor strength and comparable analgesia to traditional techniques. However, few studies in hip and knee populations include strength or function as primary outcomes. For hip surgeries, studies have failed to show analgesic differences between regional blocks and periarticular infiltration. Similarly for knee arthroplasty in the absence of periarticular infiltration, recent evidence suggests adding combinations of blocks (ACB plus iPACK or genicular nerve blocks) may balance pain control and early ambulation. SUMMARY: The use of motor-sparing peripheral nerve block techniques enables early ambulation, adequate pain control, and avoidance of opioid-related side effects facilitating outpatient/ambulatory lower extremity surgery. Further studies of these techniques for continuous peripheral nerve block catheters are needed to assess if extended blockade continues to provide motor-sparing and opioid-sparing benefits.

Inadvertent Perioperative Hypothermia.

Temperature regulation during the perioperative period plays an essential role in keeping patients safe while optimizing their recovery. The World Health Organization recommends preserving normothermia, identified as a core body temperature greater than 36°C, to minimize morbidity and mortality. The etiology of inadvertent perioperative hypothermia (IPH) varies in origin. Preoperative exposure, decreased ambient operating room (OR) temperature, skin exposure during preparation, unwarmed skin preparation and washout solutions, and lack of warming devices all contribute to IPH. Moreover, general and regional anesthesia blunt the physiologic response to hypothermia which originates in the hypothalamus. Postoperatively, patients with temperatures < 36°C are at greater risk for surgical site infection, increased mortality, longer length of hospital stay, higher 30-day readmission rates, among other complications. Identifying preoperative risk factors and OR practices that contribute to IPH, monitoring temperatures, and use of warming devices during the perioperative period can help to prevent IPH.

Regional versus general anesthesia in older patients for hip fracture surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The optimal anesthesia technique for older patients undergoing hip fracture surgery remains controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of updated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess whether regional anesthesia was superior to general anesthesia in hip fracture surgery. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 2000 until April 2022. RCTs directly comparing regional and general anesthesia in hip fracture surgery were included in the analysis. The incidence of delirium and mortality were the primary outcomes and other perioperative outcomes including complications were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Thirteen studies involving 3736 patients were included in this study. There was no significant difference in the incidence of delirium (odds ratio [OR] 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86, 1.37) and mortality (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.71, 1.64) between the two groups. Patients receiving regional anesthesia in hip fracture surgery were associated with a reduction in operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD]: - 4.74; 95% CI - 8.85, - 0.63), intraoperative blood loss (WMD: - 0.25; 95% CI - 0.37, - 0.12), postoperative pain score (WMD: - 1.77; 95% CI - 2.79, - 0.74), length of stay (WMD: - 0.10; 95% CI - 0.18, - 0.02), and risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.36, 0.87). No significant difference was observed in the other perioperative outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: For older patients undergoing hip fracture surgery, RA did not significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium and mortality compared to GA. Due to the limitations of this study, the evidence on delirium and mortality was still inconclusive and further high-quality studies are needed.

Impact of Regional Anesthesia on Subjective Quality of Recovery in Patients Undergoing Thoracic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Regional anesthesia can be effective for managing pain after thoracic surgery. This study evaluated whether it can also improve patient-reported quality of recovery (QoR) after such surgery. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. SETTING: Postoperative care. INTERVENTION: Perioperative regional anesthesia. PATIENTS: Adults undergoing thoracic surgery. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was total QoR scores 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes were postoperative opioid consumption, pain scores, pulmonary function, respiratory complications, and other adverse effects. Eight studies were identified, of which 6 involving 532 patients receiving video-assisted thoracic surgery were included in the quantitative analysis of QoR. Regional anesthesia significantly improved QoR-40 score (mean difference 9.48; 95% CI 3.53-15.44; I2 = 89%; 4 trials involving 296 patients) and QoR-15 score (mean difference 6.7; 95% CI 2.58-10.82; I2 = 0%; 2 trials involving 236 patients). Regional anesthesia also significantly reduced postoperative opioid consumption and the incidence of nausea and vomiting. Insufficient data were available to meta-analyze the effects of regional anesthesia on postoperative pulmonary function or respiratory complications. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence suggests that regional anesthesia can enhance QoR after video-assisted thoracic surgery. Future studies should confirm and extend these findings.

Truncal Blocks for Emergency Laparotomy in a High-Risk Patient: A Case Report and Literature Review.

In critically ill patients undergoing laparotomy, both general anesthesia (GA) and central neuraxial block (CNB) may pose significant risks. Peripheral truncal blocks have been reported to provide effective postoperative analgesia following laparotomy. However, there are a limited number of reports describing this technique as surgical anesthesia for laparotomy. An 86-year-old man with non-specific interstitial pneumonia under home oxygen therapy and aortic valve stenosis was diagnosed with an incarcerated inguinal hernia. Because of these comorbidities, both GA and CNB were considered relatively contraindicated. Thus, we chose an ultrasound-guided transverse abdominis plane block and ilioinguinal/iliohypogastric block supplemented with neuroleptanesthesia as surgical anesthesia for emergency laparotomy. The surgery was uneventful using this technique. Truncal blocks supplemented with titrated intravenous sedatives/analgesics could be an alternative in high-risk patients undergoing laparotomy in whom both GA and CNB are considered relatively contraindicated.

A Systematic Review on Long-Term Postsurgical Pain Outcomes; What Is the Effect of Upper Extremity Regional Anesthesia?

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a recognized complication of surgery, and it has been hypothesized that regional anesthesia might reduce the risk of development of chronic pain after upper extremity surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to assess whether in patients undergoing elective upper extremity surgery (P), regional anesthesia (I), compared to general anesthesia (C), would result in lower long-term (>3 months) postoperative pain intensity (O). We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials (RCTs). Our primary outcome was numerical rating score or visual analogue scale for pain, at >3 months postoperatively. The Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core Collections, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases were searched for all reports assessing pain at >3 months after upper extremity surgery under general versus regional anesthesia. Secondary outcomes were: opioid prescription filling, complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) incidence, the Mayo Wrist Score (MWS), and scores on the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Quality (or certainty) of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0) and nonrandomized trials (ROBINS-I). RESULTS: This review included 14 studies, comprising 7 RCTs and 7 nonrandomized studies. Six of the 7 studies (4 RCTs, N = 273; 2 nonrandomized studies, N = 305) using a pain score, our primary outcome, report comparable long-term postoperative pain scores after regional and general anesthesia. Six of the 7 studies using our secondary outcomes report comparable long-term outcomes in terms of opioid prescription filling (2 retrospective cohort studies [RCSs], N = 89,256), CRPS incidence (1 RCT, N = 301), MWS (1 RCT and 1 RCS, N = 215), and DASH score (1 RCT, N = 36). Comparable outcomes were reported in all 7 RCTs (N = 778) and in 5 of the 7 nonrandomized studies, comprising 5 RCSs (N = 89,608). Two prospective observational studies (POSTs), comprising 279 patients, report a statistically significant difference in outcomes, with less pain and better DASH scores after brachial plexus anesthesia. All 14 studies provided moderate to very low certainty evidence, and there was a serious risk of bias due to confounding bias in 5 of the 7 nonrandomized studies (N = 631). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review indicate that upper extremity regional anesthesia, compared to general anesthesia, is unlikely to change pain intensity at >3 months postoperatively.

Identification and economic burden of main adverse events of nerve injuries caused by regional anesthesia: a systematic review

Abstract Background and objectives: Anesthesiologists and hospitals are increasingly confronted with costs associated with the complications of Peripheral Nerve Blocks (PNB) procedures. The objective of our study was to identify the incidence of the main adverse events associated with regional anesthesia, particularly during anesthetic PNB, and to evaluate the associated healthcare and social costs. Methods: According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a systematic search on EMBASE and PubMed with the following search strategy: (‟regional anesthesia" OR ‟nerve block") AND (‟complications" OR ‟nerve lesion" OR ‟nerve damage" OR ‟nerve injury"). Studies on patients undergoing a regional anesthesia procedure other than spinal or epidural were included. Targeted data of the selected studies were extracted and further analyzed. Results: Literature search revealed 487 articles, 21 of which met the criteria to be included in our analysis. Ten of them were included in the qualitative and 11 articles in the quantitative synthesis. The analysis of costs included data from four studies and 2,034 claims over 51,242 cases. The median claim consisted in 39,524 dollars in the United States and 22,750 pounds in the United Kingdom. The analysis of incidence included data from seven studies involving 424,169 patients with an overall estimated incidence of 137/10,000. Conclusion: Despite limitations, we proposed a simple model of cost calculation. We found that, despite the relatively low incidence of adverse events following PNB, their associated costs were relevant and should be carefully considered by healthcare managers and decision makers.