Comparative Retrospective Study on Anaesthesia Approaches for Lumbar Spine Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVELumbar spinal surgeries have been performed with either spinal or general anaesthesia. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the superiority of either spinal or general anaesthesia on lumbar spine surgery. METHODSAfter approval of institutional ethical committee, we retrospectively analysed 270 patients (ASA I and II) undergoing surgery of lumbar spine from 2009 to 2015 by one surgeon. Of these 150 patients underwent general anaesthesia with controlled ventilation, 120 patients were offered spinal anaesthesia with conscious sedation. Patient records were reviewed to obtain demographic features, type of anaesthesia, baseline heart rate, mean arterial pressure, intraoperative maximum heart rate, mean arterial pressure, duration of surgery, amount of intravenous fluids, intraoperative blood loss, incidence of perioperative complications such as bleeding, nausea, vomiting, hypotension, bradycardia, and postoperative analgesic consumption. RESULTSPatient characteristics including baseline/intraoperative mean arterial pressure and heart rate values did not differ between groups. However, the spinal anaesthesia group experienced significantly shorter durations in the operating room and had a lower incidence of nausea, vomiting. Analgesic consumptions in general anaesthesia group was significantly higher than in spinal anaesthesia group. CONCLUSIONThe present study revealed that spinal anaesthesia is a safe and effective alternative to general anaesthesia for patients undergoing single level or two level lumbar laminectomy, discectomy, or even instrumentation below L2 level and has the advantage of decreased nausea, antiemetic, analgesic requirements, and fewer complications. It also ensures better postoperative recovery when compared to general anaesthesia.