A prospective randomised trial comparing spinal anaesthesia using hyperbaric cinchocaine with general anaesthesia for lower limb vascular surgery. Perioperative morbidity in patients randomized to epidural or general anesthesia for lower extremity vascular surgery. Perioperative Ischemia Randomized Anesthesia Trial Study Group. Cardiac outcome after peripheral vascular surgery. Comparison of general and regional anesthesia.
One hundred and one patients were randomly allocated to have their peripheral vascular surgery performed under general anaesthesia (51 patients) or spinal anaesthesia (50 patients). Intraoperative haemodynamic changes were markedly different between the two groups with a higher incidence of hypotension in the spinal group (72% vs 31%) and a higher incidence of hypertension in the general anaesthesia group (22% vs 0%). Blood loss was significantly less in the spinal group (560, SD 340, ml vs 792, SD 440, ml). Postoperatively three patients from the general anaesthesia group died from causes unrelated to the anaesthesia, and one had a myocardial infarct. Two patients in the spinal group had myocardial infarcts, both had been treated for bradycardia and hypotension intraoperatively, and one died. There was a significantly higher incidence of postoperative chest infection in the general anaesthesia group (33% vs 16%). There was no significant difference between the groups in the incidence of postoperative confusion, or lower limb amputation rate or need for further surgery prior to hospital discharge. Perioperative morbidity may be modifiable in high risk patients by the anesthesiologist's choice of either regional or general anesthesia. This clinical trial compared outcomes between epidural (EA) and general (GA) anesthesia/analgesia regimens in a group of patients at high risk for cardiac and other morbidity who were undergoing similarly stressful surgical procedures.
                One hundred patients scheduled for elective vascular reconstruction of the lower extremities were randomized to receive either EA for surgery followed by epidural analgesia, or GA for surgery followed by intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Hemodynamic monitoring, blood pressure, and heart rate limits were determined prior to randomization. Management of anesthesia in the immediate postoperative period was standardized. The data collected included continuous electrocardiographic monitoring from the day before surgery through the third postoperative day, serial electrocardiograms, and cardiac enzymes. Cardiac ischemia, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, and cardiac death were identified by a cardiologist blinded to the type of anesthesia received. Other major morbidity was determined at the time of hospital discharge and at 1 and 6 months after surgery.
                Eleven patients who received GA required regrafting or an embolectomy during their hospital stay, compared with two patients who received EA. This association of GA with reoperation remained significant after adjustment for baseline differences. Cardiac outcomes were similar in the two groups with respect to perioperative death (1 EA and 1 GA), death within 6 months (4 EA and 3 GA), nonfatal myocardial infarction within 7 days (2 EA and 2 GA), unstable angina (0 EA and 2 GA), and myocardial ischemia following randomization (17 EA and 23 GA). Rates of major infections in the two groups (1 EA and 2 GA), renal failure (3 EA and 3 GA), and pulmonary complications (3 EA and 7 GA) also were similar.
                Carefully conducted epidural and general anesthesia appear to be associated with comparable rates of cardiac and most other morbidity in patients undergoing lower extremity vascular surgery. However, compared with general anesthesia, epidural anesthesia is associated with a lower incidence of reoperation for inadequate tissue perfusion and, therefore, may be advantageous for this surgical population. Despite evidence that regional anesthesia may be associated with fewer perioperative complications than general anesthesia, most studies that have compared cardiac outcome after general or regional anesthesia alone have not shown major differences. This study examines the impact of anesthetic choice on cardiac outcome in patients undergoing peripheral vascular surgery who have a high likelihood of associated coronary artery disease.
                Four hundred twenty-three patients, between 1988 and 1991, were randomly assigned to receive general (n = 138), epidural (n = 149), or spinal anesthesia (n = 136) for femoral to distal artery bypass surgery. All patients were monitored with radial artery and pulmonary artery catheters. Postoperatively, patients were in a monitored setting for 48-72 h and had daily electrocardiograms for 4-5 days and creatine phosphokinase/isoenzymes every 8 h x 3, then daily for 4 days. Cardiac outcomes recorded were myocardial infarction, angina, and congestive heart failure.
                Baseline clinical characteristics were not different between anesthetic groups. Overall, the patient population included 86% who were diabetic, 69% with hypertension, 36% with a history of a prior myocardial infarction, and 41% with a history of smoking. Cardiovascular morbidity and overall mortality were not significantly different between groups when analyzed by either intention to treat or type of anesthesia received. In the intention to treat analysis, incidences of cardiac event or death for general, spinal, and epidural groups were 16.7%, 21.3%, and 15.4%, respectively. The absolute risk difference observed between general and all regional anesthesia groups for cardiac event or death was -1.6% (95% confidence interval -9.2%, 6.1%) This reflected a nonsignificant trend for lower risk of postoperative events with general anesthesia.
                The choice of anesthesia, when delivered as described, does not significantly influence cardiac morbidity and overall mortality in patients undergoing peripheral vascular surgery.
There was insufficient evidence available from the included trials that compared neuraxial anaesthesia with general anaesthesia to rule out clinically important differences for most clinical outcomes. Neuraxial anaesthesia may reduce pneumonia. No conclusions can be drawn with regard to mortality, myocardial infarction and rate of lower-limb amputation, or less common outcomes.