Inhalational versus intravenous maintenance of anesthesia for quality of recovery in patients undergoing corrective lower limb osteotomy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Inhalational anesthesia and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) are the two most popular methods of general anesthesia with distinct characteristics that may affect quality of recovery (QOR) differently. This study compared QOR after corrective lower limb osteotomy between desflurane-based inhalational anesthesia and propofol-based TIVA. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients, ASA class I or II who underwent corrective lower limb osteotomy were randomized to receive either desflurane anesthesia or propofol TIVA. The primary outcome was quality of recovery 40 (QoR-40) questionnaire scores on postoperative day (POD) 1 and 2. Postoperative nausea scores, antiemetic requirements, and amount of opioid consumption via intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) were assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Global QoR-40 scores on POD 1 (153.5 (140.3, 171.3) vs. 140.0 (120.0, 173.0), P = 0.056, 95% CI; -22.5, 0.2) and POD 2 (155.5 (146.8, 175.5) vs. 152.0 (134.0, 179.0), P = 0.209, 95% CI; -17.5, 3.9) were comparable between the two groups. Among the five dimensions of QoR-40, physical independence scores were significantly higher in the TIVA group compared to the Desflurane group on POD both 1 and 2. Nausea scores (0.0 (0.0, 0.0) vs. 1.0 (0.0, 3.5), P < 0.001) and number of patients requiring rescue antiemetics (0% vs. 15.2%, P = 0.017) were significantly lower in the TIVA group at the post anesthesia care unit (PACU). Although the number of bolus attempts between 0-24 h and the morphine equivalent dose of analgesics administered via IV PCA between 12-24 h were significantly less in the TIVA group compared to the Desflurane group, there was no significant difference between groups for the overall 48 h postoperative period. CONCLUSIONS: Propofol-based TIVA did not improve global QoR-40 scores compared with desflurane-based inhalational anesthesia. However, considering the better QoR-40 scores in the domain of physical independence and less nausea in the early postoperative period, propofol TIVA should be considered as a useful option in patients undergoing corrective lower limb osteotomy.

The anterolateral ligament is a secondary stabilizer in the knee joint: A validated computational model of the biomechanical effects of a deficient anterior cruciate ligament and anterolateral ligament on knee joint kinematics.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the biomechanical effect of the anterolateral ligament (ALL), anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), or both ALL and ACL on kinematics under dynamic loading conditions using dynamic simulation subject-specific knee models. METHODS: Five subject-specific musculoskeletal models were validated with computationally predicted muscle activation, electromyography data, and previous experimental data to analyze effects of the ALL and ACL on knee kinematics under gait and squat loading conditions. RESULTS: Anterior translation (AT) significantly increased with deficiency of the ACL, ALL, or both structures under gait cycle loading. Internal rotation (IR) significantly increased with deficiency of both the ACL and ALL under gait and squat loading conditions. However, the deficiency of ALL was not significant in the increase of AT, but it was significant in the increase of IR under the squat loading condition. CONCLUSION: The results of this study confirm that the ALL is an important lateral knee structure for knee joint stability. The ALL is a secondary stabilizer relative to the ACL under simulated gait and squat loading conditions.Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2019;8:509-517.