Improved outcomes for spinal versus general anesthesia for hip fracture surgery: a retrospective cohort study of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus in the literature as to whether anesthetic modality influences perioperative complications in hip fracture surgery. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of spinal anesthesia compared with general anesthesia on postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients who underwent hip fracture surgery using data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP). METHODS: We used the ACS NSQIP to identify patients aged 50 and older who received either spinal or general anesthesia for hip fracture surgery from 2016 to 2019. Propensity-score matching was performed to control for clinically relevant covariates. The primary outcome of interest was the combined incidence of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or death within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, hospital length of stay and operative time. RESULTS: Among the 40 527 patients aged 50 and over who received either spinal or general anesthesia for hip fracture surgery from 2016 to 2019, 7358 spinal anesthesia cases were matched to general anesthesia cases. General anesthesia was associated with a higher incidence of combined 30-day stroke, MI or death compared with spinal anesthesia (OR 1.219 (95% CI 1.076 to 1.381); p=0.002). General anesthesia was also associated with a higher frequency of 30-day mortality (OR 1.276 (95% CI 1.099 to 1.481); p=0.001) and longer operative time (64.73 vs 60.28 min; p<0.001). Spinal anesthesia had a longer average hospital length of stay (6.29 vs 5.73 days; p=0.001). CONCLUSION: Our propensity-matched analysis suggests that spinal anesthesia as compared with general anesthesia is associated with lower postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery.

The anaesthetic management of patients with thoracic ascending aortic aneurysms: A review.

Thoracic aortic aneurysms present significant challenges to clinicians, especially due to their complex nature and an evolving understanding of the safest and most effective ways to manage this condition in the perioperative setting. Thoracic aortic aneurysms have a prevalence rate of 1.3-8.9% in men and 1.0-2.2% in women, and they are estimated to affect more than five per 100,000 person-years. This is notable because the complications of thoracic aortic aneurysms can be catastrophic. The current understanding of the optimal intraoperative management of thoracic aortic aneurysms is changing, as more evidence becomes available regarding lung protective ventilation and its role in enhancing patient safety and wellbeing. This review strives to provide a brief historical understanding of thoracic aortic aneurysms and highlight some of the key discoveries and advances in the management of this condition. This review then describes an overview of the general anaesthetic principles associated with thoracic aortic aneurysms, including ventilatory modalities and how these impact a patient's physiology and intraoperative haemodynamics. A brief discussion on one-lung ventilation is then provided, drawing from current literature in the field, to describe the most up-to-date management of thoracic aortic aneurysms.

Dental clearance and postoperative heart infections: Observations from a preoperative evaluation clinic for day-admission surgery.

Every year, two-million hospitalised patients develop healthcare-associated infections with a consequent mortality eclipsing 90,000. The literature suggests that dental infections are one of many potential sources of these infections and may be associated with an increased risk of endocarditis in surgical patients, especially those undergoing cardiac procedures, though some studies have conversely shown no heightened risk of cardiac infections in patients forgoing pre-surgical dental screenings. We sought to elucidate whether patients seen at our preoperative evaluation clinic who obtained pre-surgical dental clearance experienced improved outcomes compared to those who did not receive dental clearance prior to their surgical interventions. The medical records of 196 consecutive patients were reviewed who were seen at the pre-anaesthesia evaluation prior to elective cardiac surgery from July 2017 to February 2018. Of this cohort, 102 patients had pre-surgical dental clearance, while 94 did not have dental clearance. Preoperative demographic and comorbidity data were analysed using independent t-tests. We found no significant differences between these group in terms of post-operation infections (zero instances versus four instances, p > 0.05), length of intensive care unit stay (two days versus two days, p = 0.815), or mortality associated with elective cardiac procedures (zero instances). Further evaluation of preoperative dental clearance and its potential to prevent morbidity (e.g. postoperative infections) is warranted.