Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Advances in Therapy 1/2020

Open Access 01-01-2020 | Spinal Anesthesia | Original Research

Factors Determining the Choice of Spinal Versus General Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Ambulatory Surgery: Results of a Multicenter Observational Study

Authors: Xavier Capdevila, Christophe Aveline, Laurent Delaunay, Hervé Bouaziz, Paul Zetlaoui, Olivier Choquet, Laurent Jouffroy, Hélène Herman-Demars, Francis Bonnet

Published in: Advances in Therapy | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Available short-acting intrathecal anesthetic agents (chloroprocaine and prilocaine) offer an alternative to general anesthesia for short-duration surgical procedures, especially ambulatory surgeries. Factors determining the choice of anesthesia for short-duration procedures have not been previously identified.

Methods

This observational, prospective, multicenter, cohort study was conducted between July 2015 and July 2016, in 33 private or public hospitals performing ambulatory surgery. The primary objective was to determine the factors influencing the choice of anesthetic technique (spinal or general anesthesia). Secondary outcomes included efficacy of the anesthesia, time to hospital discharge, and patient satisfaction.

Results

Among 592 patients enrolled, 309 received spinal anesthesia and 283 underwent general anesthesia. In both study arms, the most frequently performed surgical procedures were orthopedic and urologic (43.3% and 30.7%, respectively); 66.1% of patients were free to choose their type of anesthesia, 21.8% chose one of the techniques because they were afraid of the other, 16.8% based their choice on the expected ease of recovery, 19.2% considered their degree of anxiety/stress, and 16.9% chose the technique on the basis of its efficacy. The median times to micturition and to unassisted ambulation were significantly shorter in the general anesthesia arm compared with the spinal anesthesia arm (225.5 [98; 560] min vs. 259.0 [109; 789] min; p = 0.0011 and 215.0 [30; 545] min vs. 240.0 [40; 1420]; p = 0.0115, respectively). The median time to hospital discharge was equivalent in both study arms. In the spinal anesthesia arm, patients who received chloroprocaine and prilocaine recovered faster than patients who received bupivacaine. The time to ambulation and the time to hospital discharge were shorter (p < 0.001). The overall success rate of spinal anesthesia was 91.6%, and no significant difference was observed between chloroprocaine, prilocaine, and bupivacaine. The patients’ global satisfaction with anesthesia and surgery was over 90% in both study arms.

Conclusions

Patient’s choice, patient fear of the alternative technique, patient stress/anxiety, the expected ease of recovery, and the efficacy of the technique were identified as the main factors influencing patient choice of short-acting local anesthesia or general anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia with short-acting local anesthetics was preferred to general anesthesia in ambulatory surgeries and was associated with a high degree of patient satisfaction.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02529501. Registered on June 23, 2015. Date of enrollment of the first participant July 21, 2015.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lefebvre-Hoang I, Yilmaz E. Etat de lieux des pratiques de chirurgie ambulatoire en 2016. Dossiers de la DRESS. 2019;41:5–29. Lefebvre-Hoang I, Yilmaz E. Etat de lieux des pratiques de chirurgie ambulatoire en 2016. Dossiers de la DRESS. 2019;41:5–29.
2.
go back to reference Nilsson U, Jaensson M, Dahlberg K, Hugelius K. Postoperative recovery after general and regional anesthesia in patients undergoing day surgery: a mixed methods study. J Peri Anesth Nurs. 2019;34(3):517–28.CrossRef Nilsson U, Jaensson M, Dahlberg K, Hugelius K. Postoperative recovery after general and regional anesthesia in patients undergoing day surgery: a mixed methods study. J Peri Anesth Nurs. 2019;34(3):517–28.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Liu SS, McDonald SB. Current issues in spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 2001;94(5):888–906.CrossRef Liu SS, McDonald SB. Current issues in spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 2001;94(5):888–906.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Mulroy MF. Advances in regional anesthesia for outpatients. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2002;15(6):641–5.CrossRef Mulroy MF. Advances in regional anesthesia for outpatients. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2002;15(6):641–5.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Camponovo C, Fanelli A, Ghisi D, Cristina D, Fanelli G. A prospective, double-blinded, randomized, clinical trial comparing the efficacy of 40 mg and 60 mg hyperbaric 2% prilocaine versus 60 mg plain 2% prilocaine for intrathecal anesthesia in ambulatory surgery. Anesth Analg. 2010;111(2):568–72.CrossRef Camponovo C, Fanelli A, Ghisi D, Cristina D, Fanelli G. A prospective, double-blinded, randomized, clinical trial comparing the efficacy of 40 mg and 60 mg hyperbaric 2% prilocaine versus 60 mg plain 2% prilocaine for intrathecal anesthesia in ambulatory surgery. Anesth Analg. 2010;111(2):568–72.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Calderón-Ochoa F, Mesa Oliveros A, Rincón Plata G, Pinto Quiñones I. Effectiveness and safety of exclusive spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine versus femoral sciatic block during the postoperative period of patients having undergone knee arthroscopy: systematic review. Colom J Anesthesiol. 2019;47(1):57–68.CrossRef Calderón-Ochoa F, Mesa Oliveros A, Rincón Plata G, Pinto Quiñones I. Effectiveness and safety of exclusive spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine versus femoral sciatic block during the postoperative period of patients having undergone knee arthroscopy: systematic review. Colom J Anesthesiol. 2019;47(1):57–68.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Liu SS, Strodtbeck WM, Richman JM, Wu CL. A comparison of regional versus general anesthesia for ambulatory anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Anesth Analg. 2005;101(6):1634–42.CrossRef Liu SS, Strodtbeck WM, Richman JM, Wu CL. A comparison of regional versus general anesthesia for ambulatory anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Anesth Analg. 2005;101(6):1634–42.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Capdevila X, Dadure C. Perioperative management for 1 day hospital admission: regional anesthesia is better than general anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2004;55(Suppl):33–6.PubMed Capdevila X, Dadure C. Perioperative management for 1 day hospital admission: regional anesthesia is better than general anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2004;55(Suppl):33–6.PubMed
9.
go back to reference Pourel E, Lambert M, Mekler G, et al. Anesthésie LocoRegionale en Ambulatoire. In: Conférences d'Actualisation Elsevier Ed, 2008. pp 61–75. Pourel E, Lambert M, Mekler G, et al. Anesthésie LocoRegionale en Ambulatoire. In: Conférences d'Actualisation Elsevier Ed, 2008. pp 61–75.
10.
go back to reference Parker MJ, Handoll HH, Griffiths R. Anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;4:521. Parker MJ, Handoll HH, Griffiths R. Anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;4:521.
11.
go back to reference Pugely AJ, Martin CT, Gao Y, Mendoza-Lattes S, Callaghan JJ. Differences in short-term complications between spinal and general anesthesia for primary total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2013;95(3):193–9.CrossRef Pugely AJ, Martin CT, Gao Y, Mendoza-Lattes S, Callaghan JJ. Differences in short-term complications between spinal and general anesthesia for primary total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2013;95(3):193–9.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Bessa SS, Katri KM, Abdel-Salam WN, El-Kayal E-SA, Tawfik TA. Spinal versus general anesthesia for day-case laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012;22(6):550–5.CrossRef Bessa SS, Katri KM, Abdel-Salam WN, El-Kayal E-SA, Tawfik TA. Spinal versus general anesthesia for day-case laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012;22(6):550–5.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Fernández-Ordóñez M, Tenías JM, Picazo-Yeste J. Spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia in the surgical treatment of inguinal hernia. Cost-effectiveness analysis. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2014;61(5):254–61.CrossRef Fernández-Ordóñez M, Tenías JM, Picazo-Yeste J. Spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia in the surgical treatment of inguinal hernia. Cost-effectiveness analysis. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2014;61(5):254–61.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Morris MT, et al. An analysis of the cost-effectiveness of spinal versus general anesthesia for lumbar spine surgery in various hospital settings. Global Spine J. 2019;9(4):368–74.CrossRef Morris MT, et al. An analysis of the cost-effectiveness of spinal versus general anesthesia for lumbar spine surgery in various hospital settings. Global Spine J. 2019;9(4):368–74.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Lennox PH, Vaghadia H, Henderson C, Martin L, Mitchell GWE. Small-dose selective spinal anesthesia for short-duration outpatient laparoscopy: recovery characteristics compared with desflurane anesthesia. Anesth. Analg. 2002;94(2):346–50.PubMed Lennox PH, Vaghadia H, Henderson C, Martin L, Mitchell GWE. Small-dose selective spinal anesthesia for short-duration outpatient laparoscopy: recovery characteristics compared with desflurane anesthesia. Anesth. Analg. 2002;94(2):346–50.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Schneider M, et al. Transient neurologic toxicity after hyperbaric subarachnoid anesthesia with 5% lidocaine. Anesth Analg. 1993;76(5):1154–7.CrossRef Schneider M, et al. Transient neurologic toxicity after hyperbaric subarachnoid anesthesia with 5% lidocaine. Anesth Analg. 1993;76(5):1154–7.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Tarkkila P, Huhtala J, Tuominen M. Transient radicular irritation after spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric 5% lignocaine. Br J Anaesth. 1995;74(3):328–9.CrossRef Tarkkila P, Huhtala J, Tuominen M. Transient radicular irritation after spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric 5% lignocaine. Br J Anaesth. 1995;74(3):328–9.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Freedman JM, Li D-K, Drasner K, Jaskela MC, Larsen B, Wi S. Transient neurologic symptoms after spinal anesthesia: an epidemiologic study of 1863 patients. Anesthesiology. 1998;89(3):633–41.CrossRef Freedman JM, Li D-K, Drasner K, Jaskela MC, Larsen B, Wi S. Transient neurologic symptoms after spinal anesthesia: an epidemiologic study of 1863 patients. Anesthesiology. 1998;89(3):633–41.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Pollock JE, Mulroy MF, Bent E, Polissar NL. A comparison of two regional anesthetic techniques for outpatient knee arthroscopy. Anesth Analg. 2003;97(2):397–401.CrossRef Pollock JE, Mulroy MF, Bent E, Polissar NL. A comparison of two regional anesthetic techniques for outpatient knee arthroscopy. Anesth Analg. 2003;97(2):397–401.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Hampl KF, Schneider MC, Pargger H, Gut J, Drewe J, Drasner K. A similar incidence of transient neurologic symptoms after spinal anesthesia with 2% and 5% lidocaine. Anesth Analg. 1996;83(5):1051–4.CrossRef Hampl KF, Schneider MC, Pargger H, Gut J, Drewe J, Drasner K. A similar incidence of transient neurologic symptoms after spinal anesthesia with 2% and 5% lidocaine. Anesth Analg. 1996;83(5):1051–4.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Camponovo C, et al. Intrathecal 1% 2-chloroprocaine vs. 0.5% bupivacaine in ambulatory surgery: a prospective, observer-blinded, randomised, controlled trial: Spinal chloroprocaine vs. bupivacaine. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2014;58(5):560–6.CrossRef Camponovo C, et al. Intrathecal 1% 2-chloroprocaine vs. 0.5% bupivacaine in ambulatory surgery: a prospective, observer-blinded, randomised, controlled trial: Spinal chloroprocaine vs. bupivacaine. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2014;58(5):560–6.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Lacasse M-A, et al. Comparison of bupivacaine and 2-chloroprocaine for spinal anesthesia for outpatient surgery: a double-blind randomized trial. Can J Anesth. 2011;58(4):384–91.CrossRef Lacasse M-A, et al. Comparison of bupivacaine and 2-chloroprocaine for spinal anesthesia for outpatient surgery: a double-blind randomized trial. Can J Anesth. 2011;58(4):384–91.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Black AS, Newcombe GN, Plummer JL, McLeod DH, Martin DK. Spinal anaesthesia for ambulatory arthroscopic surgery of the knee: a comparison of low-dose prilocaine and fentanyl with bupivacaine and fentanyl. Br J Anaesth. 2011;106(2):183–8.CrossRef Black AS, Newcombe GN, Plummer JL, McLeod DH, Martin DK. Spinal anaesthesia for ambulatory arthroscopic surgery of the knee: a comparison of low-dose prilocaine and fentanyl with bupivacaine and fentanyl. Br J Anaesth. 2011;106(2):183–8.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Guntz E, Latrech B, Tsiberidis C, Gouwy J, Kapessidou Y. ED50 and ED90 of intrathecal hyperbaric 2% prilocaine in ambulatory knee arthroscopy. Can J Anaesth. 2014;61(9):801–7.CrossRef Guntz E, Latrech B, Tsiberidis C, Gouwy J, Kapessidou Y. ED50 and ED90 of intrathecal hyperbaric 2% prilocaine in ambulatory knee arthroscopy. Can J Anaesth. 2014;61(9):801–7.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Matthey PW, Finegan BA, Finucane BT. The public’s fears about and perceptions of regional anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2004;29(2):96–101.PubMed Matthey PW, Finegan BA, Finucane BT. The public’s fears about and perceptions of regional anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2004;29(2):96–101.PubMed
26.
go back to reference Oldman M, et al. A survey of orthopedic surgeons’ attitudes and knowledge regarding regional anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2004;98(5):1486–90.CrossRef Oldman M, et al. A survey of orthopedic surgeons’ attitudes and knowledge regarding regional anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2004;98(5):1486–90.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Park YB, Chae WS, Park SH, Yu JS, Lee SG, Yim SJ. Comparison of short-term complications of general and spinal anesthesia for primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2017;29(2):96–103.CrossRef Park YB, Chae WS, Park SH, Yu JS, Lee SG, Yim SJ. Comparison of short-term complications of general and spinal anesthesia for primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2017;29(2):96–103.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Boublik J, Gupta R, Bhar S, Atchabahian A. Prilocaine spinal anesthesia for ambulatory surgery: a review of the available studies. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2016;35(6):417–21.CrossRef Boublik J, Gupta R, Bhar S, Atchabahian A. Prilocaine spinal anesthesia for ambulatory surgery: a review of the available studies. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2016;35(6):417–21.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Teunkens A, Vermeulen K, Van Gerven E, Fieuws S, Van de Velde M, Rex S. Comparison of 2-chloroprocaine, bupivacaine, and lidocaine for spinal anesthesia in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy in an outpatient setting: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016;41(5):576–83.CrossRef Teunkens A, Vermeulen K, Van Gerven E, Fieuws S, Van de Velde M, Rex S. Comparison of 2-chloroprocaine, bupivacaine, and lidocaine for spinal anesthesia in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy in an outpatient setting: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016;41(5):576–83.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Ghosh S, Sallam S. Patient satisfaction and postoperative demands on hospital and community services after day surgery. Br J Surg. 1994;81(11):1635–8.CrossRef Ghosh S, Sallam S. Patient satisfaction and postoperative demands on hospital and community services after day surgery. Br J Surg. 1994;81(11):1635–8.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Chung F, Un V, Su J. Postoperative symptoms 24 h after ambulatory anaesthesia. Can J Anaesth. 1996;43(11):1121–7.CrossRef Chung F, Un V, Su J. Postoperative symptoms 24 h after ambulatory anaesthesia. Can J Anaesth. 1996;43(11):1121–7.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Factors Determining the Choice of Spinal Versus General Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Ambulatory Surgery: Results of a Multicenter Observational Study
Authors
Xavier Capdevila
Christophe Aveline
Laurent Delaunay
Hervé Bouaziz
Paul Zetlaoui
Olivier Choquet
Laurent Jouffroy
Hélène Herman-Demars
Francis Bonnet
Publication date
01-01-2020
Publisher
Springer Healthcare
Published in
Advances in Therapy / Issue 1/2020
Print ISSN: 0741-238X
Electronic ISSN: 1865-8652
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01171-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Advances in Therapy 1/2020 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.