Epidural Analgesia in Ventral Hernia Repair: An Analysis of 30-day Outcomes.

Q3 Medicine
Psychopharmacology bulletin Pub Date : 2020-10-15
Mark R Jones, Ethan Y Brovman, Amy E Wagenaar, Samuel P Ang, Edward E Whang, Alan D Kaye, Richard D Urman
{"title":"Epidural Analgesia in Ventral Hernia Repair: An Analysis of 30-day Outcomes.","authors":"Mark R Jones,&nbsp;Ethan Y Brovman,&nbsp;Amy E Wagenaar,&nbsp;Samuel P Ang,&nbsp;Edward E Whang,&nbsp;Alan D Kaye,&nbsp;Richard D Urman","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ventral hernia repair (VHR) is a common procedure associated with significant postoperative morbidity and prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS). The use of epidural analgesia in VHR has not been widely evaluated.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the outcomes of general anesthesia plus epidural analgesia (GA + EA) versus general anesthesia alone (GA) in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify elective cases of VHR. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to compare outcomes in GA vs GA + EA groups. Cases receiving transverse abdominus plane blocks were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 9697 VHR cases were identified, resulting in two matched cohorts of 521 cases each. LOS was significantly longer in the GA + EA group (5.58 days) vs the GA group (5.20 days, p = 0.008). No other statistically significant differences in 30-day outcomes were observed between the matched cohorts.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Epidural analgesia in VHR is associated with statistically significant, but not clinically significant increase in LOS and may not yield any additional benefit in cases of isolated, elective VHR. Epidural analgesia may not be beneficial in this surgical population. Future studies should focus on alternative modes of analgesia to optimize pain control and outcomes for this procedure.</p>","PeriodicalId":21069,"journal":{"name":"Psychopharmacology bulletin","volume":"50 4 Suppl 1","pages":"33-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7901129/pdf/PB-50-4S1-33.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychopharmacology bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ventral hernia repair (VHR) is a common procedure associated with significant postoperative morbidity and prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS). The use of epidural analgesia in VHR has not been widely evaluated.

Purpose: To compare the outcomes of general anesthesia plus epidural analgesia (GA + EA) versus general anesthesia alone (GA) in patients undergoing ventral hernia repair.

Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify elective cases of VHR. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to compare outcomes in GA vs GA + EA groups. Cases receiving transverse abdominus plane blocks were excluded.

Results: A total of 9697 VHR cases were identified, resulting in two matched cohorts of 521 cases each. LOS was significantly longer in the GA + EA group (5.58 days) vs the GA group (5.20 days, p = 0.008). No other statistically significant differences in 30-day outcomes were observed between the matched cohorts.

Conclusion: Epidural analgesia in VHR is associated with statistically significant, but not clinically significant increase in LOS and may not yield any additional benefit in cases of isolated, elective VHR. Epidural analgesia may not be beneficial in this surgical population. Future studies should focus on alternative modes of analgesia to optimize pain control and outcomes for this procedure.

腹疝修补术中的硬膜外镇痛:30天疗效分析。
背景:腹疝修补术(VHR)是一种常见的手术,与显著的术后发病率和延长住院时间(LOS)相关。硬膜外镇痛在VHR中的应用尚未得到广泛评价。目的:比较全麻加硬膜外镇痛(GA + EA)与单纯全麻(GA)在腹疝修补术中的效果。方法:使用美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划数据库来确定选择性VHR病例。倾向评分匹配分析用于比较GA组与GA + EA组的结果。排除接受横腹平面阻滞的病例。结果:共鉴定出9697例VHR病例,分为两组,每组521例。GA + EA组的LOS(5.58天)明显长于GA组(5.20天,p = 0.008)。在匹配的队列之间,30天的结果没有观察到其他统计学上的显著差异。结论:VHR的硬膜外镇痛与统计学上显著相关,但在临床上没有显著性的LOS增加,并且对于孤立的、选择性的VHR病例可能不会产生任何额外的益处。硬膜外镇痛可能对这类手术人群无效。未来的研究应侧重于替代镇痛模式,以优化疼痛控制和手术结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychopharmacology bulletin
Psychopharmacology bulletin PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-PSYCHIATRY
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信