We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Effectiveness of Spinal Anaesthesia versus General Anaesthesia for Open Cholecystectomy.
BACKGROUND: Cholecystectomy is performed either as an open or a laparascopic route. Despite of a number of peri-operative and post-operative benefits of laparascopic cholecystectomy, the traditional and invasive open cholecystectomy is still in frequent practice for various reasons. Though general anaesthesia is regarded as the gold standard anaesthetic technique, alternatives to it such as spinal anaesthesia, with its advantages, outweighs general anaesthesia. Spinal anaesthesia, therefore, could be a safe and effective anaesthetic procedure over general anaesthesia for open cholecystectomy.
METHODS: 120 patients with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease undergoing open cholecystectomy and complying with ASA I or II physical status, aged between 18 and 70 years of either sex and BMI ≤ 30 kg/m2 were enrolled for the study. They were randomly categorized into SA group (received spinal anaesthesia) and GA group (received general anaesthesia), each group containing 60 patients. Intra-operative events and post-operative events were observed up to 48 hours post-surgery and compared between the groups. Data is in percentage and mean with standard deviation and median. Statistical analysis was done using independent t-test, chi-square test, relative risks and ANOVA.
RESULTS: Spinal anaesthesia is safe and effective in pain management post open cholecystectomy. The median pain-free intervalin SA group was 8hours as compared to 1 hour in GA group. The average mean pain score was also significantly less in SA group than in GA group at all intervals of time observed. Majority (90%) in SA groups were managed with intramuscular diclofenacsodium whereas majority in GA group were managed with intramuscular pethedine. Intra-operatively, SA group had more cases of haemodynamic instability than GA group, which were easily managed in both the groups. The differences in the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting and the days of hospital stay between the groups were not significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anaesthesia is safe and more effective than general anaesthesia for uncomplicated open cholecystectomy in terms of peri-operative events and, in reducing post-operative pain, as well as in terms of surgeon's satisfaction as well.
METHODS: 120 patients with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease undergoing open cholecystectomy and complying with ASA I or II physical status, aged between 18 and 70 years of either sex and BMI ≤ 30 kg/m2 were enrolled for the study. They were randomly categorized into SA group (received spinal anaesthesia) and GA group (received general anaesthesia), each group containing 60 patients. Intra-operative events and post-operative events were observed up to 48 hours post-surgery and compared between the groups. Data is in percentage and mean with standard deviation and median. Statistical analysis was done using independent t-test, chi-square test, relative risks and ANOVA.
RESULTS: Spinal anaesthesia is safe and effective in pain management post open cholecystectomy. The median pain-free intervalin SA group was 8hours as compared to 1 hour in GA group. The average mean pain score was also significantly less in SA group than in GA group at all intervals of time observed. Majority (90%) in SA groups were managed with intramuscular diclofenacsodium whereas majority in GA group were managed with intramuscular pethedine. Intra-operatively, SA group had more cases of haemodynamic instability than GA group, which were easily managed in both the groups. The differences in the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting and the days of hospital stay between the groups were not significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anaesthesia is safe and more effective than general anaesthesia for uncomplicated open cholecystectomy in terms of peri-operative events and, in reducing post-operative pain, as well as in terms of surgeon's satisfaction as well.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app