Johnson, Rebecca L

Background and objectives Thoracic paravertebral blockade is often used as an anesthetic and/or analgesic technique for breast surgery. With ultrasound guidance, the rate of complications is speculated to be lower than when using landmark-based techniques. This investigation aimed to quantify the incidence of pleural puncture and pneumothorax following non-continuous ultrasound-guided thoracic paravertebral blockade for breast surgery. Methods Patients who received thoracic paravertebral blockade for breast surgery were identified by retrospective query of our institution’s electronic database over a 5-year period. Data collected included patient demographics, level of block, type and volume of local anesthetic, occurrence of pleural puncture, occurrence of pneumothorax, evidence of local anesthetic toxicity, and patient vital signs. The incidence of block complications, including pleural puncture, pneumothorax, and local anesthetic toxicity, were ascertained. Results 529 patients underwent 2163 thoracic paravertebral injections. Zero pleural punctures were identified during block performance; however, two patients were found to have a pneumothorax on postoperative chest X-ray (3.6 per 1000 surgeries, 95% CI 0.5 to 13.6; 0.9 per 1000 levels blocked, 95% CI 0.1 to 3.3). There were no cases of local anesthetic systemic toxicity or associated lipid emulsion therapy administration. Conclusions Pneumothorax following non-continuous ultrasound-guided thoracic paravertebral block using a parasagittal approach is an uncommon occurrence, with a similar rate to pneumothorax following breast surgery alone.

Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is transitioning to be an outpatient rather than an inpatient procedure under national and institutional pressures to increase volumes while reducing hospital costs and length of stay. Innovative surgical and anesthesia techniques have allowed for earlier ambulation and physical therapy participation, maximizing the chance that an appropriately selected patient may be discharged within a day of surgery. The choice of anesthesia type is a modifiable factor that has a major impact on both surgical outcomes and discharge readiness. Recent large database studies have provided evidence for improved outcomes, including decreased mortality, with the use of spinal anesthesia. However, few randomized, controlled trials exist and database studies have limitations. Modern general anesthesia techniques, including total intravenous anesthesia and infusions targeted to anesthetic depth, may make some of these differences insignificant, especially when newer regional anesthesia and local infiltration analgesia techniques are incorporated into TJA enhanced recovery protocols. Multimodal analgesia for all TJA patients may also help minimize differences in pain. Perhaps even more important than anesthesia technique is the proper selection of patients likely to meet the necessary milestones for early discharge. In this article, we provide two contrasting viewpoints on the optimal primary anesthetic for outpatient TJA.

Background Frailty increases risk for complications after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Whether this association is influenced by anesthetic administered is unknown. We hypothesized that use of neuraxial (spinal or epidural) anesthesia is associated with better outcomes compared with general anesthesia, and that the effect of anesthesia type on outcomes differs by frailty status. Methods This single-institution cohort study included all patients (≥50 years) from January 2005 through December 2016 undergoing unilateral, primary and revision TJA. Using multivariable Cox regression, we assessed relationships between anesthesia type, a preoperative frailty deficit index (FI) categorized as non-frail (FI <0.11), vulnerable (FI 0.11 to 0.20), and frail (FI >0.20), and complications (mortality, infection, wound complications/hematoma, reoperation, dislocation, and periprosthetic fracture) within 1 year after surgery. Interactions between anesthesia type and frailty were tested, and stratified models were presented when an interaction (p<0.1) was observed. Results Among 18 458 patients undergoing TJA, more patients were classified as frail (21.5%) and vulnerable (36.2%) than non-frail (42.3%). Anesthesia type was not associated with complications after adjusting for age, joint, and revision type. However, in analyzes stratified by frailty, vulnerable patients under neuraxial block had less mortality (HR=0.49; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.89) and wound complications/hematoma (HR=0.71; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.90), whereas no difference in risk by anesthesia type was observed among patients found non-frail or frail. Conclusions Neuraxial anesthesia use among vulnerable patients was associated with improved survival and less wound complications. Calculating preoperative frailty prior to TJA informs perioperative risk and enhances shared-decision making for selection of anesthesia type.

Background: Debate surrounds the issue of whether peripheral nerve blockade or periarticular infiltration (PAI) should be employed within a contemporary, comprehensive multimodal analgesia pathway for total hip arthroplasty. We hypothesized that patients treated with a continuous posterior lumbar plexus block (PNB) would report less pain and consume less opioid medication than those treated with PAI. Methods: This investigator-initiated, independently funded, 3-arm randomized clinical trial (RCT) performed at a single high-volume institution compared postoperative analgesia interventions for elective, unilateral primary total hip arthroplasty: (1) PNB; (2) PAI with ropivacaine, ketorolac, and epinephrine (PAI-R); and (3) PAI with liposomal bupivacaine, ketorolac, and epinephrine (PAI-L) using computerized randomization. The primary outcome was maximum pain during the morning (06:00 to 12:00) of the first postoperative day (POD) on an ascending numeric rating scale (NRS) from 0 to 10. Pairwise treatment comparisons were performed using the rank-sum test, with a p value of <0.017 indicating significance (Bonferroni adjusted). A sample size of 150 provided 80% power to detect a difference of 2.0 NRS units. Results: We included 159 patients (51, 54, and 54 patients in the PNB, PAI-R, and PAI-L groups, respectively). No significant differences were found with respect to the primary end point on the morning of the first POD (median, 3.0, 4.0, and 3.0, respectively; p > 0.033 for all). Opioid consumption was low and did not differ across groups at any intervals. Median maximum pain on POD 1 was 5.0, 5.5, and 4.0, respectively, and was lower for the PAI-L group than for the PAI-R group (p = 0.006). On POD 2, maximum pain (median, 3.5, 5.0, and 3.5, respectively) was lower for the PNB group (p = 0.014) and PAI-L group (p = 0.016) compared with the PAI-R group. The PAI-L group was not significantly different from the PNB group with respect to any outcomes: postoperative opioid use including rescue intravenous opioid medication, length of stay, and hospital adverse events, and 3-month follow-up data including any complication. Conclusions: In this RCT, we found a modest improvement with respect to analgesia in patients receiving PNB compared with those receiving PAI-R, but not compared with those who had PAI-L. Secondary analyses suggested that PNB or PAI-L provides superior postoperative analgesia compared with PAI-R. For primary total hip arthroplasty, a multimodal analgesic regimen including PNB or PAI-L provides opioid-limiting analgesia. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.