[Complications of spinal anesthesia compared to general anesthesia. A prospective study of 408 consecutive orthopedic patients]. / Komplikationer ved spinal anaestesi sammenlignet med generel anaestesi. En prospektiv undersøgelse omfattende 408 konsekutive ortopaedkirurgiske patienter.

UNLABELLED: In this prospective study the preoperative risk classification and pulmonary status was compared to postoperative mortality and morbidity, following either spinal or general anaesthesia. We studied 408 consecutive orthopaedic patients. Comparing the anaesthetic methods we found no differences in mortality or in frequency of cardiac complications, while the non-cardiac complications were seen more frequently in patients who had undergone spinal anaesthesia (p < 0.05). Patients from the lower risk groups with a preoperative abnormal pulmonary status had a higher frequency of postoperative pulmonary complications following spinal anaesthesia than following general anaesthesia (p = 0.015). IN CONCLUSION: 1) We find no difference in postoperative mortality depending on the anaesthetic method chosen, 2) the predictive value of the Boston Cardiac Risk index is identical for the two anaesthetic methods, and 3) the anaesthetic method of choice for the pulmonary disabled patient has not yet been established.

[Risk and hemodynamic instability in spinal anesthesia]. / Risiko og haemodynamisk instabilitet ved spinal anaestesi.

We investigated 131 consecutive patients who were submitted to orthopaedic surgical interventions under spinal anaesthesia during a period of 12 months. Prior to operation, all of the patients were classified according to the Boston Cardiac Risk Index. Immediately before operation, approximately 500 ml sodium chloride solution was infused. Patients were registered as haemodynamically unstable when a peroperative fall in the mean arterial pressure of more than 30% occurred or when the systolic blood pressure fell to less than 80 mmHg. In 40 patients, haemodynamically unstable conditions developed peroperatively while 91 were haemodynamically stable. In Boston group III, 67% of the patients were haemodynamically unstable peroperatively which was significantly more than in the Boston group I (25%) and the Boston group II (32%) (p less than 0.005). The postoperative mortality was significantly higher (13%) among the total number of peroperatively haemodynamically unstable patients than among the peroperatively stable patients (3%) (p less than 0.05). In Boston group III, the postoperative mortality was 42% as compared with 1% and 7% in the Boston groups I and II, respectively (p less than 0.05). It is concluded that the risk of fall in blood pressure during spinal anaesthesia may be predicted by the Boston Cardiac Risk Index and that patients who develop haemodynamic instability during spinal anaesthesia have an increased risk of developing complications. These patients should be offered maximal postoperative observation and care.