Key result
General anesthesia resulted in significantly lower intraocular pressure compared to combined spinal-epidural anesthesia after tourniquet placement during lower extremity surgeries (P < 0.001).
Why the study?
General anesthesia induction and pneumatic tourniquets both raise intraocular pressure, but the comparative effects of general anesthesia versus combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in surgeries using tourniquets required evaluation.
Does combined spinal-epidural anesthesia compared to general anesthesia affect intraocular pressure in patients undergoing lower extremity surgeries with pneumatic tourniquets?
Population
50 patients aged over 18 y undergoing lower extremity surgeries employing pneumatic tourniquets
Comparison
General anesthesia vs combined spinal-epidural anesthesia
Design
Randomized clinical trial
Authors
Loading...
GA may better blunt tourniquet-related IOP rises than CSEA; leaves open whether this alters visual outcomes in high-risk patients.
RCT (n=50)
Open-label
Computer program and sealed envelope method
No
Does combined spinal-epidural anesthesia compared to general anesthesia affect intraocular pressure in patients undergoing lower extremity surgeries with pneumatic tourniquets?
Absolute Event Rate: 15.96% vs 23.72%
p-value: p=<0.001
Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia results in higher intraocular pressure during lower extremity surgeries with pneumatic tourniquets compared to general anesthesia.
Yıldız et al. (2023) conducted an RCT in Lower extremity surgery employing pneumatic tourniquets (n=50). General anesthesia vs. Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSEA) was evaluated on Intraocular pressure (IOP) after placement of the tourniquet (T3) in the right eye (p=<0.001). General anesthesia resulted in significantly lower intraocular pressure compared to combined spinal-epidural anesthesia after tourniquet placement during lower extremity surgeries (P < 0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: