Haemodynamic Stability and Vasopressor Use During Low-dose Spinal Anaesthesia in the High Risk Elderly with Fractured Neck of Femur

Crit Care & Shock 01/2009; 12.

ABSTRACT Background: Surgical repair of fractured neck of femur in the elderly is frequently performed under spinal anaesthesia. Elderly patients are particularly susceptible to developing hypotension with this technique. The use of single shot, low-dose bupivacaine/ fentanyl spinal anaesthesia has been shown to significantly reduce the incidence of hypotension. This clinical audit compares the haemodynamic stability and the adequacy of the sensory block duration in elderly patients receiving low-dose bupivacaine spinal anaesthesia with patients receiving standard dose spinal anaesthesia. Method: Data from 60 elderly patients who had undergone surgical repair of fractured neck of femur within the same time period was collected using theatre coding records and systematic review of clinical notes. Thirty patients received a low-dose (4mg) bupivacaine plus 20 μg fentanyl spinal anaesthetic (LDSA), 30 received a standard dose (10-14 mg) bupivacaine plus fentanyl (10-20 μg) spinal anaesthetic (SDSA). Significant hypotension was defined as a systolic pressure decrease equal to or more than 25% of base line value or absolute value ≤90 mmHg. Results: 76% of the SDSA group compared to 10% of the LDSA group experienced significant hypotension. Decreases in mean systolic pressures from baseline over time were significantly greater in the SDSA group (p<0.001). The incidence of inadequate surgical blocks was higher in the LDSA group at 26% (n=8) compared to 3% (n=1) in the SDSA group. Six of the 8 LDSA patients with inadequate blocks reported pain/ discomfort around wound closure. Conclusion: In our elderly patients low-dose bupivacaine/fentanyl spinal anaesthesia provides greater haemodynamic stability compared to standard dose spinal anaesthesia during surgical repair of hip fractures. In a small percentage of patients in the LDSA group the surgical time outlasted the sensory block duration however, local anaesthetic applied to the operation site allowed uneventful completion of surgery.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hip fractures lead to excess deaths and substantial disability. Most are related both to falls and to osteoporosis, which affects one in four post-menopausal white women, but a lesser number of men or women of other races. Consequently, about half of the 1.66 million hip fractures worldwide in 1990 occurred in Europe and North America. Even within these regions, however, there is substantial variation in hip fracture incidence rates, which suggests the existence of important environmental factors that could be manipulated to reduce hip fracture occurrence. This is important because in the United States alone, a quarter of a million hip fractures annually cost over $8 billion, mostly for acute medical care and nursing home services. Future costs will be even greater because populations are ageing rapidly around the world and because hip fracture incidence rates are rising in some regions. The number of elderly is increasing most rapidly in Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa, and these regions will account for over 70% of the 6.26 million hip fractures expected in the year 2050. Because fracture treatment is expensive, and rehabilitation not always successful, effective prophylaxis offers the only hope of alleviating the enormous social burden of hip fractures.
    Bone 02/1993; 14 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S1-8. DOI:10.1016/8756-3282(93)90341-7 · 4.46 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hip fracture surgery is common and the population at risk is generally elderly. There is no consensus of opinion regarding the safest form of anaesthesia for these patients. We performed a meta-analysis of 15 randomized trials that compare morbidity and mortality associated with general or regional anaesthesia for hip fracture patients. There was a reduced 1-month mortality and incidence of deep vein thrombosis in the regional anaesthesia group. Operations performed under general anaesthesia had a reduction in operation time. No other outcome measures reached a statistically significant difference. There was a tendency towards a lower incidence of myocardial infarction, confusion and postoperative hypoxia in the regional anaesthetic group, and cerebrovascular accident and intra-operative hypotension in the general anaesthetic group. We conclude that there are marginal advantages for regional anaesthesia compared to general anaesthesia for hip fracture patients in terms of early mortality and risk of deep vein thrombosis.
    BJA British Journal of Anaesthesia 05/2000; 84(4):450-5. DOI:10.1093/oxfordjournals.bja.a013468 · 4.35 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fracture of the hip typically occurs in older women. These patients usually have serious accompanying chronic illnesses. There is a difference of opinion as to the choice of regional versus general anesthesia for surgery in these patients. This meta-analysis compared survival of patients with traumatic femoral neck fractures undergoing operative repair during regional or general anesthesia. The data sources were articles comparing regional and general anesthesia from peer reviewed journals. Thirteen randomized controlled trials were found. Besides 1-month mortality, variables used were estimated operative blood loss and the incidence of deep venous thrombosis. For dichotomous outcomes, two effect measures were calculated: the difference in probabilities and the odds ratio. For blood loss, a continuous variable, the effect measure was the mean difference in blood loss. A random-effects Bayesian meta-analysis was used to combine study data, estimate parameters and create 95% confidence intervals. Only the incidence of deep venous thrombosis was clearly greater for patients receiving general anesthesia, being 31 percentage points higher than for patients receiving regional anesthesia. By the odds ratio, deep venous thrombosis was almost four times more likely following general anesthesia. There was no difference in estimated operative blood loss. By probability difference, mortality was a non-significant 2.7 percentage points less following regional anesthesia. By odds ratio effect measure, death was 1.5 times more likely following general anesthesia, but the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval was close to 1. Meta-analysis does not allow a conclusion that important differences in mortality exist between regional and general anesthesia for traumatic hip fracture surgery.
    Anesthesiology 01/1993; 77(6):1095-104. DOI:10.1097/00000542-199212000-00009 · 6.17 Impact Factor
Show more