The effect of spinal versus general anaesthesia on perioperative muscle weakness in patients having bilateral total hip arthroplasty: a single center randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative neuro-endocrine stress response may contribute to acquired muscle weakness. Regional anaesthesia has been reported to improve the outcome of patients having total hip arthroplasty. In this study, it was hypothesized that spinal anaesthesia (SA) decreases the perioperative neuro-endocrine stress response and perioperatively acquired muscle weakness (PAMW), as compared to general anaesthesia (GA). METHODS: Fifty subjects undergoing bilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA) were randomly allocated to receive a standardized SA (n = 25) or GA (n = 25). Handgrip strength was assessed preoperatively, on the first postoperative day (primary endpoint) and on day 7 and 28. Respiratory muscle strength was measured by maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP). Stress response was assessed by measuring levels of Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), cortisol and interleukin-6 (IL-6). RESULTS: Handgrip strength postoperatively (day 1) decreased by 5.4 ± 15.9% in the SA group, versus 15.2 ± 11.7% in the GA group (p = 0.02). The handgrip strength returned to baseline at day 7 and did not differ between groups at day 28. MIP increased postoperatively in patients randomized to SA by 11.7 ± 48.3%, whereas it decreased in GA by 12.2 ± 19.9% (p = 0.04). On day 7, MIP increased in both groups, but more in the SA (49.0 ± 47.8%) than in the GA group (14.2 ± 32.1%) (p = 0.006). Postoperatively, the levels of ACTH, cortisol and IL-6 increased in the GA, but not in the SA group (p < 0.004). CONCLUSION: In patients having bilateral THA, SA preserved the postoperative respiratory and peripheral muscle strength and attenuated the neuro-endocrine and inflammatory responses. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03600454.

The Effect of Deep Versus Moderate Neuromuscular Block on Surgical Conditions and Postoperative Respiratory Function in Bariatric Laparoscopic Surgery: A Randomized, Double Blind Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: In recent literature, it has been suggested that deep neuromuscular block (NMB) improves surgical conditions during laparoscopy; however, the evidence supporting this statement is limited, and this was not investigated in laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Moreover, residual NMB could impair postoperative respiratory function. We tested the hypotheses that deep NMB could improve the quality of surgical conditions for laparoscopic bariatric surgery compared with moderate NMB and investigated whether deep NMB puts patients at risk for postoperative respiratory impairment compared with moderate NMB. METHODS: Sixty patients were evenly randomized over a deep NMB group (rocuronium bolus and infusion maintaining a posttetanic count of 1-2) and a moderate NMB group (rocuronium bolus and top-ups maintaining a train-of-four count of 1-2). Anesthesia was induced and maintained with propofol and remifentanil. The primary outcome measures were the quality of surgical conditions assessed by a single surgeon using a 5-point rating scale (1 = extremely poor, 5 = optimal), the number of intra-abdominal pressure increases >18 cmH2O and the duration of surgery. Secondary outcome measure was the postoperative pulmonary function assessed by peak expiratory flow, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and forced vital capacity, and by the need for postoperative respiratory support. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation with estimated treatment effect (ETE: mean difference [95% confidence interval]) for group comparisons. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the surgeon's rating regarding the quality of the surgical field between the deep and moderate NMB group (4.2 ± 1.0 vs 3.9 ± 1.1; P = .16, respectively; ETE: 0.4 [-0.1, 0.9]). There was no difference in the proportional rating of surgical conditions over the 5-point rating scale between both groups (P = .91). The number of intra-abdominal pressure increases >18 cmH2O and the duration of surgery were not statistically different between the deep and moderate NMB group (0.2 ± 0.9 vs 0.3 ± 1.0; P = .69; ETE: -0.1 [-0.5, 0.4] and 61.3 ± 15.1 minutes vs 70.6 ± 20.8 minutes; P = .07, ETE: -9.3 [-18.8, 0.1], respectively). All the pulmonary function tests were considerably impaired in both groups when compared with baseline (P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in the decrease in peak expiratory flow, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and forced vital capacity (expressed as % change from baseline) between the deep and the moderate NMB group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with a moderate NMB, there was insufficient evidence to conclude that deep NMB improves surgical conditions during laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Postoperative pulmonary function was substantially decreased after laparoscopic bariatric surgery independently of the NMB regime that was used. The study is limited by a small sample size.