Epidural Versus Local Anesthesia for Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGNS: Systematic Review. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of anesthesia type on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complications after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A significant advantage of PELD involves the option to use alternative sedation to general anesthesia (GA). Two options include local anesthesia (LA) and epidural anesthesia (EA). While EA is more involved, it may yield improved pain control and surgical results compared with LA. However, few studies have directly examined outcomes for PELD after LA versus EA, and it remains unknown which technique results in superior outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases examining PELD performed with LA or EA from inception to August 16, 2021 were conducted. All studies reported greater than 6 months of follow-up in addition to PRO data. PROs, including visual analog scale (VAS)-leg/back, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were collected. Complications, recurrent disk herniation, durotomy, and reoperation rates, as well as surgical data, were recorded. All outcomes were compared between pooled studies examining LA or EA. RESULTS: Fifty-six studies consisting of 4465 patients (366 EA, 4099 LA) were included. Overall complication rate, durotomy rate, length of stay, recurrent disk herniation, and reoperation rates were similar between groups. VAS back/leg and ODI scores were all significantly improved at the first and last follow-up appointments in the LA group. VAS leg and ODI scores were significantly improved at the first and last follow-up appointments in the EA group, but VAS back was not. CONCLUSIONS: EA can be a safe and feasible alternative to LA, potentially minimizing patient discomfort during PELD. Conclusions are limited by a high level of study bias and heterogeneity. Further investigation is necessary to determine if PELD under EA may have greater short-term PRO benefits compared with LA.

One in Three Chance of Finding A Plastic Surgeon on Major Hospital Websites.

There is an increasing trend of nonplastic surgeons performing breast surgery. Within, we evaluate the representation of plastic surgeons listed for breast reconstruction on major hospital system websites within the United States. Methods: The website search engines for the top 20 US medical centers according to the US News and World Report's Hospital Rankings from 2020 to 2021 were queried for search terms pertaining to breast reconstruction. Information collected for search results included gender, if they were a physician, medical specialty, medical school and residency attended, and each individual's position within the search results. Results: Across 80 distinct search attempts, 27 searches (34%) produced no results. The search term "breast reconstruction" yielded the most plastic surgeon search results, with plastic surgeons composing 39% of all search results. The search term "mastectomy" generated the least number of plastic surgeon results, with a 16% representation of plastic surgeons. Nearly two-thirds of physicians identified were nonplastic surgeons (67%). Other surgeons represented 47% of search results and obstetricians/gynecologists, 2%. Nonsurgeons represented 18% of queries. On average, plastic surgeons appeared higher on search lists than nonplastic surgeons, 13th to 39th, respectively (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Plastic surgeons composed only a third of physicians identified, and a third of searches produced no results. Patients interested in breast reconstruction may encounter difficulty finding an appropriate plastic surgeon. Inadequate search engines on hospital websites introduce inefficiencies for the entire health care systems and may negatively impact hospital and physician bottom line.

General vs Local Anesthesia for Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy (PELD): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: It remains unknown whether general anesthesia (GA) or local ± epidural anesthesia (LA) results in superior outcomes with percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). The present study sought to examine the impact of anesthesia type on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complications with PELD. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis examining PELD performed under GA or LA was conducted. Patient-reported outcomes including Visual Analog Scale (VAS)-leg/back, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were collected. Complication, recurrent disc herniation, durotomy, and reoperation rates as well as surgical data were recorded. All outcomes were compared between pooled studies examining GA or LA. RESULTS: Sixty-eight studies consisting of 5269 patients (724 GA, 4465 LA) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall complication rate was significantly higher in the GA group (9% vs 4%, P = .003). Durotomy rates, length of stay, recurrent disc herniation and reoperation rates were similar between groups. At the first follow-up timepoint, the LA group demonstrated significant improvements in VAS back and ODI scores (P < .05) while the GA group did not (P > .05). At the final follow-up (> 6 months), the percent of patients achieving an excellent McNab score was significantly higher in the GA vs LA group (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy with LA may be associated with greater short-term improvement in VAS back pain and ODI scores. General anesthesia may be associated with more durable pain relief but a higher complication rate. Further systematic investigation is necessary to determine what short and long term benefits are associated with PELD performed under LA and GA.

Microendoscopic lumbar discectomy with general versus local anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: While general anesthesia (GA) is the most commonly used anesthetic method during lumbar microendoscopic discectomy (MED), local ± epidural anesthesia (LA) has been gaining popularity as an alternate method. Theoretical advantages of LA include reduced morbidity of anesthesia and improved surgeon-patient communication facilitating less nerve root manipulation and yielding improved surgical outcomes. The objective of this systematic review is to examine the impact of anesthesia type on patient reported outcomes (PROs) and complications with MED. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature examining MED performed under GA or LA was performed. The PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS databases were searched from inception to August 16, 2021, utilizing strict inclusion and exclusion criteria with all studies reporting greater than 6 months of follow-up and PRO data. PROs including Visual Analog Scale (VAS)-leg/back, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) and/or 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) physical component scores were collected. Complication, recurrent disc herniation, durotomy and reoperation rates as well as surgical factors were collected. All outcomes were compared between pooled studies examining GA or LA. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: A total of 23 studies consisting of 2,868 patients (1,335 GA, 1,533 LA) were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between GA and LA groups in regard to overall complication rate, durotomy rate, recurrent disc herniation rate, reoperation rate, blood loss, or surgical time (p > 0.05). Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in ODI and JOA (p<0.0004), however leg and back VAS was only improved in GA (p<0.0025) and not in LA (p>0.058), and SF-36 only in LA (p=0.003). Conclusions: Patients undergoing MED under both anesthetic techniques demonstrated significant improvements in ODI and JOA, with no significant differences in complication or reoperation rates. However, patients undergoing GA demonstrated significant improvement in VAS leg and back pain at last follow-up while LA did not. LA may be offered to carefully selected patients and prior studies have demonstrated reduced costs and risks with LA. Conclusions are limited by a high level of study bias and heterogeneity. Further investigation is needed to assess the true effects of GA and LA on outcomes after MED.

Loss of cardiac myosin light chain kinase contributes to contractile dysfunction in right ventricular pressure overload.

Nearly 1 in every 100 children born have a congenital heart defect. Many of these defects primarily affect the right heart causing pressure overload of the right ventricle (RV). The RV maintains function by adapting to the increased pressure; however, many of these adaptations eventually lead to RV hypertrophy and failure. In this study, we aim to identify the cellular and molecular mechanisms of these adaptions. We utilized a surgical animal model of pulmonary artery banding (PAB) in juvenile rats that has been shown to accurately recapitulate the physiology of right ventricular pressure overload in young hearts. Using this model, we examined changes in cardiac myocyte protein expression as a result of pressure overload with mass spectrometry 4 weeks post-banding. We found pressure overload of the RV induced significant downregulation of cardiac myosin light chain kinase (cMLCK). Single myocyte calcium and contractility recordings showed impaired contraction and relaxation in PAB RV myocytes, consistent with the loss of cMLCK. In the PAB myocytes, calcium transients were of smaller amplitude and decayed at a slower rate compared to controls. We also identified miR-200c, which has been shown to regulate cMLCK expression, as upregulated in the RV in response to pressure overload. These results indicate the loss of cMLCK is a critical maladaptation of the RV to pressure overload and represents a novel target for therapeutic approaches to treat RV hypertrophy and failure associated with congenital heart defects.