Why the study?
Although protocols exist for spinal anesthesia in spine surgery, many are not applicable in resource-limited countries.
Does spinal anesthesia combined with local infiltration provide stable vital signs and effective pain control in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery in resource-limited countries?
Does spinal anesthesia combined with local infiltration provide stable vital signs and effective pain control in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery in resource-limited countries?
Spinal anesthesia combined with local infiltration may be a feasible and effective alternative to general anesthesia for lumbar spine surgery in resource-limited settings.
Supports spinal anesthesia feasibility for lumbar surgery in resource-limited settings; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
Introduction: Lumbar spine surgery can be performed under either general or spinal anesthesia. Numerous studies highlight the benefits of spinal anesthesia (SA), including cost-effectiveness, reduced anesthesia-related complications, and suitability for patients who do not favor general anesthesia (GA). Those informal case series emphasizes the advantages of SA and introduces a working protocol tailored for resource-limited countries (RLCs). Presentation of case: Two patients, aged 35 and 58, underwent spinal surgery using SA combined with local infiltration for the skin and facet joints. We implemented a new protocol believed to be beneficial in RLCs. In both cases, intraoperative vital signs remained stable, and there was effective pain control postoperatively. Clinical discussion: Spine surgery under SA has gained acceptance due to evidence indicating reduced perioperative risks and lower opioid consumption, alongside decreased healthcare costs. Although there are suggested protocols for SA in spine surgery, many are not applicable in RLCs. Our case series demonstrate similar advantages, suggesting that the protocol used in this study may be helpful. Despite its benefits, SA for spine surgery still faces resistance and has not been widely adopted in many neurosurgery centers. Conclusion: The study aim to outline essential steps for initiating SA for spine surgery in RLCs. The guidelines utilized in this study have proven effective. SA can lead to reduced healthcare costs, lower opioid usage, and increased patient turnover. The two cases series demonstrate improved anesthesia outcomes. Future randomized clinical trials with sufficiently large sample sizes are necessary to establish high-quality evidence regarding the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of SA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sulaiman Jemal Muzien (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: