BackgroundHip fracture is a trauma of the elderly. The worldwide number of patients in need of surgery after hip fracture will increase in the coming years. The 30-day mortality ranges between 4 and 14%. Patients’ outcome may be improved by anaesthesia technique (general vs. neuraxial anaesthesia). There is a dearth of evidence from randomised studies regarding to the optimal anaesthesia technique. However, several large non-randomised studies addressing this question have been published from the onset of 2010.MethodsTo compare the 30-day mortality rate, in-hospital mortality rate and length of hospital stay after neuraxial (epidural/spinal) or general anaesthesia in hip fracture patients (≥ 18 years old) we prepared a systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic search for appropriate retrospective observational and prospective randomised studies in Embase and PubMed databases was performed in the time-period from 01.01.2010 to 21.11.2016. Additionally a forward searching in google scholar, a level one reference list searching and a formal searching of trial registries was performed.ResultsTwenty retrospective observational and three prospective randomised controlled studies were included. There was no difference in the 30-day mortality [OR 0.99; 95% CI (0.94 to 1.04), p = 0.60] between the general and the neuraxial anaesthesia group. The in-hospital mortality [OR 0.85; 95% CI (0.76 to 0.95), p = 0.004] and the length of hospital stay were significantly shorter in the neuraxial anaesthesia group [MD -0.26; 95% CI (−0.36 to −0.17); p < 0.00001].ConclusionNeuraxial anaesthesia is associated with a reduced in-hospital mortality and length of hospitalisation. However, type of anaesthesia did not influence the 30-day mortality. In future there is a need for large randomised studies to examine the association between the type of anaesthesia, post-operative complications and mortality.

BackgroundAwake craniotomy (AC) renders an expanded role in functional neurosurgery. Yet, evidence for optimal anaesthesia management remains limited. We aimed to summarise the latest clinical evidence of AC anaesthesia management and explore the relationship of AC failures on the used anaesthesia techniques.MethodsTwo authors performed independently a systematic search of English articles in PubMed and EMBASE database 1/2007-12/2015. Search included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), observational trials, and case reports (n>4 cases), which reported anaesthetic approach for AC and at least one of our pre-specified outcomes: intraoperative seizures, hypoxia, arterial hypertension, nausea and vomiting, neurological dysfunction, conversion into general anaesthesia and failure of AC. Random effects meta-analysis was used to estimate event rates for four outcomes. Relationship with anaesthesia technique was explored using logistic meta-regression, calculating the odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals [95%CI].ResultsWe have included forty-seven studies. Eighteen reported asleep-awake-asleep technique (SAS), twenty-seven monitored anaesthesia care (MAC), one reported both and one used the awake-awake-awake technique (AAA). Proportions of AC failures, intraoperative seizures, new neurological dysfunction and conversion into general anaesthesia (GA) were 2% [95%CI:1–3], 8% [95%CI:6–11], 17% [95%CI:12–23] and 2% [95%CI:2–3], respectively. Meta-regression of SAS and MAC technique did not reveal any relevant differences between outcomes explained by the technique, except for conversion into GA. Estimated OR comparing SAS to MAC for AC failures was 0.98 [95%CI:0.36–2.69], 1.01 [95%CI:0.52–1.88] for seizures, 1.66 [95%CI:1.35–3.70] for new neurological dysfunction and 2.17 [95%CI:1.22–3.85] for conversion into GA. The latter result has to be interpreted cautiously. It is based on one retrospective high-risk of bias study and significance was abolished in a sensitivity analysis of only prospectively conducted studies.ConclusionSAS and MAC techniques were feasible and safe, whereas data for AAA technique are limited. Large RCTs are required to prove superiority of one anaesthetic regime for AC.

Background The isolated forearm technique allows assessment of consciousness of the external world (connected consciousness) through a verbal command to move the hand (of a tourniquet-isolated arm) during intended general anesthesia. Previous isolated forearm technique data suggest that the incidence of connected consciousness may approach 37% after a noxious stimulus. The authors conducted an international, multicenter, pragmatic study to establish the incidence of isolated forearm technique responsiveness after intubation in routine practice. Methods Two hundred sixty adult patients were recruited at six sites into a prospective cohort study of the isolated forearm technique after intubation. Demographic, anesthetic, and intubation data, plus postoperative questionnaires, were collected. Univariate statistics, followed by bivariate logistic regression models for age plus variable, were conducted. Results The incidence of isolated forearm technique responsiveness after intubation was 4.6% (12/260); 5 of 12 responders reported pain through a second hand squeeze. Responders were younger than nonresponders (39 ± 17 vs. 51 ± 16 yr old; P = 0.01) with more frequent signs of sympathetic activation (50% vs. 2.4%; P = 0.03). No participant had explicit recall of intraoperative events when questioned after surgery (n = 253). Across groups, depth of anesthesia monitoring values showed a wide range; however, values were higher for responders before (54 ± 20 vs. 42 ± 14; P = 0.02) and after (52 ± 16 vs. 43 ± 16; P = 0.02) intubation. In patients not receiving total intravenous anesthesia, exposure to volatile anesthetics before intubation reduced the odds of responding (odds ratio, 0.2 [0.1 to 0.8]; P = 0.02) after adjustment for age. Conclusions Intraoperative connected consciousness occurred frequently, although the rate is up to 10-times lower than anticipated. This should be considered a conservative estimate of intraoperative connected consciousness.

BACKGROUNDDesflurane's short emergence time supports fast track anaesthesia. Data on the rate of upper airway complications and emergence time when desflurane is used with laryngeal mask airway (LMA) are controversial and limited.OBJECTIVESTo compare recovery time variables and the rates of upper airway adverse events in patients with an LMA undergoing general surgery with desflurane, sevoflurane, isoflurane or propofol anaesthesia.DESIGNA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).DATA SOURCESA systematic search for eligible RCTs in Embase (Elsevier) and in PubMed (National Library of Medicine) databases up to September 2013.ELIGIBILITY CRITERIARCTs investigating the rates of cough overall, cough at emergence, laryngospasm, time to eye opening, time to removal of the LMA, time to respond to command and time to state date of birth in patients with an LMA, during emergence from desflurane, sevoflurane, isoflurane or propofol anaesthesia.RESULTSThirteen RCTs were included and analysed. We found a strong interstudy variability. There was no difference in the rates of upper airway events between desflurane and sevoflurane or between desflurane and a control group consisting of all the other anaesthetics combined. Comparing desflurane (n = 284) with all other anaesthetic groups (n = 313), the risk ratio [95% confidence interval (95% CI)] was 1.12 (0.63 to 2.02, P = 0.70). Cough at emergence was only measured in patients receiving desflurane (n = 148) and sevoflurane (n = 146): the risk ratio (95% CI) was 1.49 (0.55 to 4.02, P = 0.43). Laryngospasm was rare and there was no significant difference in its incidence when desflurane (n = 262) was compared with all other anaesthetics combined (n = 289; risk ratio 1.03; 95% CI 0.33 to 3.20, P = 0.96). The times of all emergence variables were significantly faster in the desflurane group than in all other groups.CONCLUSIONWhen using an LMA, upper airway adverse reactions in association with desflurane anaesthesia were no different from those noted with sevoflurane, isoflurane or propofol anaesthesia. Emergence from general anaesthesia with desflurane is significantly faster than all the other anaesthetics. Due to interstudy variations and the small size of the trials, further large-scale, multicentre studies are required to confirm or refute the results of this meta-analysis.