Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Apr;16(4):524-9.

Spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for elective lumbar spine surgery: A randomized clinical trial

Mohammad Ali Attari  1 , Sayyed Ahmad Mirhosseini, Azim Honarmand, Mohammad Reza Safavi
Affiliations

Spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for elective lumbar spine surgery: A randomized clinical trial

Mohammad Ali Attari et al. J Res Med Sci. 2011 Apr.

Abstract

Background: Either general or regional anesthesia can be used for lumbar disk surgery. The common anesthetic technique is general anesthesia (GA). The aim of this study was to compare the intra and postoperative outcomes of spinal anesthesia (SA) with GA in these patients.

Methods: Seventy-two patients were enrolled in the study. They were randomized into two groups with 37 patients in GA Group and 35 ones in SA Group. The heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), blood loss, surgeons satisfaction with the operating conditions, the severity of postoperative pain based on visual analogue scale (VAS) and analgesic use were recorded.

Results: The mean blood loss was significantly less in the SA Group compared to GA Group (p < 0.05). Intraoperative maximum blood pressure and heart rate changes were significantly less in SA Group (p < 0.05). The surgeons satisfaction was significantly more in the SA Group (p < 0.05). The number of patients who used postoperative analgesic as well as postoperative mean VAS was significantly less in SA Group in comparison with GA group (p < 0.05 for both).

Conclusions: Our study showed that SA was superior to GA in providing postoperative analgesia and decreasing blood loss while maintained better perioperative hemodynamic stability without increasing adverse side effects.

Keywords: Anesthesia; General; Lumbar Surgery; Spinal.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interests

Authors have no conflict of interests.

References

    1. Cucchiara RF, Michenfelder JD. Clinical Neuroanesthesia. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1990. Vertebral column and spinal cord surgery; pp. 325–50.
    1. Abrishamkar S, Aminmansour B, Arti H. The effectiveness of computed tomography scans versus magnetic resonance imaging for decision making in patients with low back pain and radicular leg pain. Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2006;11(6):351–4.
    1. Modig J, Karlstrom G. Intra- and post-operative blood loss and haemodynamics in total hip replacement when performed under lumbar epidural versus general anaesthesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 1987;4(5):345–55. - PubMed
    1. Rodgers A, Walker N, Schug S, McKee A, Kehlet H, van Zundert A, et al. Reduction of postoperative mortality and morbidity with epidural or spinal anaesthesia: results from overview of randomised trials. BMJ. 2000;321(7275):1493. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Urwin SC, Parker MJ, Griffiths R. General versus regional anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84(4):450–5. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources