Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Barbosa, Fabiano Timbó
Publication Date: 2013
Other Authors: Castro, Aldemar Araújo, Sousa-Rodrigues, Célio Fernando de
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: São Paulo medical journal (Online)
Download full: https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1388
Summary: CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Taking the outcome of mortality into consideration, there is controversy about the beneficial effects of neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of neuraxial anesthesia versus general anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review at Universidade Federal de Alagoas. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 10, 2012), PubMed (1966 to November 2012), Lilacs (1982 to November 2012), SciELO, EMBASE (1974 to November 2012) and reference lists of the studies included. Only randomized controlled trials were included. RESULTS: Out of 5,032 titles and abstracts, 17 studies were included. There were no statistically significant differences in mortality (risk difference, RD: -0.01; 95% confidence interval, CI: -0.04 to 0.01; n = 1903), stroke (RD: 0.02; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.08; n = 259), myocardial infarction (RD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.02; n = 291), length of hospitalization (mean difference, -0.05; 95% CI: -0.69 to 0.58; n = 870), postoperative cognitive dysfunction (RD: 0.00; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.05; n = 479) or pneumonia (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.49; n = 167). CONCLUSION: So far, the evidence available from the studies included is insufficient to prove that neuraxial anesthesia is more effective and safer than general anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. However, this systematic review does not rule out clinically important differences with regard to mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, length of hospitalization, postoperative cognitive dysfunction or pneumonia.
id APM-1_417ad3e2e3a6cac4fe5aa070266616ab
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.diagnosticoetratamento.emnuvens.com.br:article/1388
network_acronym_str APM-1
network_name_str São Paulo medical journal (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trialsAnestesia neuroaxial para cirurgia ortopédica: revisão sistemática e metanálise de ensaios clínicos randomizadosMortalidadeAnestesia geralAnestesia epiduralRaquianestesiaRevisãoMortalityAnesthesia, generalAnesthesia, epiduralAnesthesia, spinalReview [publication type]CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Taking the outcome of mortality into consideration, there is controversy about the beneficial effects of neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of neuraxial anesthesia versus general anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review at Universidade Federal de Alagoas. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 10, 2012), PubMed (1966 to November 2012), Lilacs (1982 to November 2012), SciELO, EMBASE (1974 to November 2012) and reference lists of the studies included. Only randomized controlled trials were included. RESULTS: Out of 5,032 titles and abstracts, 17 studies were included. There were no statistically significant differences in mortality (risk difference, RD: -0.01; 95% confidence interval, CI: -0.04 to 0.01; n = 1903), stroke (RD: 0.02; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.08; n = 259), myocardial infarction (RD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.02; n = 291), length of hospitalization (mean difference, -0.05; 95% CI: -0.69 to 0.58; n = 870), postoperative cognitive dysfunction (RD: 0.00; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.05; n = 479) or pneumonia (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.49; n = 167). CONCLUSION: So far, the evidence available from the studies included is insufficient to prove that neuraxial anesthesia is more effective and safer than general anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. However, this systematic review does not rule out clinically important differences with regard to mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, length of hospitalization, postoperative cognitive dysfunction or pneumonia.CONTEXTO E OBJETIVO: Considerando o desfecho de mortalidade, existe controvérsia acerca dos efeitos benéficos da anestesia neuroaxial (AN) para cirurgias ortopédicas. O objetivo do estudo foi comparar efetividade e segurança da AN versus anestesia geral (AG) para cirurgias ortopédicas. TIPO DE ESTUDO E LOCAL: Revisão sistemática na Universidade Federal de Alagoas. MÉTODOS: Buscamos em Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2012, volume 10), PubMed (1966 até novembro de 2012), Lilacs (1982 até novembro de 2012), SciELO, EMBASE (1974 até novembro de 2012) e listas de referências dos estudos incluídos. Apenas ensaios clínicos randomizados foram incluídos. RESULTADOS: Dentre 5.032 títulos e resumos, 17 estudos foram incluídos. Não houve diferença estatística em mortalidade (diferença de risco, DR: -0,01; intervalo de confiança de 95%, IC: -0,04 a 0.01; n = 1903), em acidente vascular encefálico (DR: 0,02; IC 95%: -0,04 a 0,08; n = 259, em infarto miocárdico (DR: -0.01; IC 95%: -0,04 a 0.02; n = 291), tempo de hospitalização (diferença média, -0,05; IC 95%: -0,69 a 0,58; n = 870), em disfunção cognitiva pós-operatória (DR: 0,00; IC 95%: -0,04 a 0,05; n = 479) e pneumonia (razão de chances, 0,61; IC 95%: 0,25 a 1,49; n = 167). CONCLUSÃO: Até o momento, as evidências são insuficientes nos estudos incluídos para provar que AN é mais efetiva e segura do que AG para cirurgias ortopédicas. Esta revisão sistemática não descartou diferenças clínicas importantes para mortalidade, acidente vascular encefálico, infarto miocárdico, tempo de internação, disfunção cognitiva pós-operatória e pneumonia.São Paulo Medical JournalSão Paulo Medical Journal2013-11-11info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1388São Paulo Medical Journal; Vol. 131 No. 6 (2013); 411-421São Paulo Medical Journal; v. 131 n. 6 (2013); 411-4211806-9460reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)instname:Associação Paulista de Medicinainstacron:APMenghttps://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1388/1298https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBarbosa, Fabiano TimbóCastro, Aldemar AraújoSousa-Rodrigues, Célio Fernando de2023-08-31T16:45:06Zoai:ojs.diagnosticoetratamento.emnuvens.com.br:article/1388Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/spmjPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevistas@apm.org.br1806-94601516-3180opendoar:2023-08-31T16:45:06São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicinafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Anestesia neuroaxial para cirurgia ortopédica: revisão sistemática e metanálise de ensaios clínicos randomizados
title Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
spellingShingle Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Barbosa, Fabiano Timbó
Mortalidade
Anestesia geral
Anestesia epidural
Raquianestesia
Revisão
Mortality
Anesthesia, general
Anesthesia, epidural
Anesthesia, spinal
Review [publication type]
title_short Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_full Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_fullStr Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_full_unstemmed Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
title_sort Neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
author Barbosa, Fabiano Timbó
author_facet Barbosa, Fabiano Timbó
Castro, Aldemar Araújo
Sousa-Rodrigues, Célio Fernando de
author_role author
author2 Castro, Aldemar Araújo
Sousa-Rodrigues, Célio Fernando de
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Barbosa, Fabiano Timbó
Castro, Aldemar Araújo
Sousa-Rodrigues, Célio Fernando de
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Mortalidade
Anestesia geral
Anestesia epidural
Raquianestesia
Revisão
Mortality
Anesthesia, general
Anesthesia, epidural
Anesthesia, spinal
Review [publication type]
topic Mortalidade
Anestesia geral
Anestesia epidural
Raquianestesia
Revisão
Mortality
Anesthesia, general
Anesthesia, epidural
Anesthesia, spinal
Review [publication type]
description CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Taking the outcome of mortality into consideration, there is controversy about the beneficial effects of neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of neuraxial anesthesia versus general anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review at Universidade Federal de Alagoas. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 10, 2012), PubMed (1966 to November 2012), Lilacs (1982 to November 2012), SciELO, EMBASE (1974 to November 2012) and reference lists of the studies included. Only randomized controlled trials were included. RESULTS: Out of 5,032 titles and abstracts, 17 studies were included. There were no statistically significant differences in mortality (risk difference, RD: -0.01; 95% confidence interval, CI: -0.04 to 0.01; n = 1903), stroke (RD: 0.02; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.08; n = 259), myocardial infarction (RD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.02; n = 291), length of hospitalization (mean difference, -0.05; 95% CI: -0.69 to 0.58; n = 870), postoperative cognitive dysfunction (RD: 0.00; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.05; n = 479) or pneumonia (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.49; n = 167). CONCLUSION: So far, the evidence available from the studies included is insufficient to prove that neuraxial anesthesia is more effective and safer than general anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. However, this systematic review does not rule out clinically important differences with regard to mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, length of hospitalization, postoperative cognitive dysfunction or pneumonia.
publishDate 2013
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2013-11-11
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1388
url https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1388
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/1388/1298
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv São Paulo Medical Journal
São Paulo Medical Journal
publisher.none.fl_str_mv São Paulo Medical Journal
São Paulo Medical Journal
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv São Paulo Medical Journal; Vol. 131 No. 6 (2013); 411-421
São Paulo Medical Journal; v. 131 n. 6 (2013); 411-421
1806-9460
reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)
instname:Associação Paulista de Medicina
instacron:APM
instname_str Associação Paulista de Medicina
instacron_str APM
institution APM
reponame_str São Paulo medical journal (Online)
collection São Paulo medical journal (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicina
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistas@apm.org.br
_version_ 1825135063828791296