Regional subarachnoid anesthesia vs. Balanced General in Total Abdominal Hysterectomy: Cross-sectional study at the Hospital of San José

Anestecia regional subaracnoidea vs. General balanceada en Histerectomía abdominal total: Estudio de corte transversal en el Hospital de San José

Introduction: total abdominal hysterectomy is one of the most common gynecological surgical procedures performed at the Hospital de San José. The discussion about which is better between the GA and the RA for this type of procedure, dates from 1936.1 Likewise, the presentation of adverse events observed in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) have been the object of multiple studies "2 for To define which technique can be superior, without being able to determine differences between the two, this cross-sectional study seeks to find them in terms of opioid consumption, pain rescue in the PACU and the presentation of adverse events. methods: this is a cross-sectional study in cases taken to abdominal hysterectomy.The sample size is 29 patients collected by intentional sampling, 20 received balanced AG and nine subarachnoid RA, following strict control of the inclusion criteria, standardization of procedures for each of the techniques, informed consent and approval of the medical ethics committee of the Hospital de San José The data collection was carried out using a format designed for the study, which included the measurement of validated scales and a final survey. The analysis was carried out using the Epiinfo program, version 2002. Results: the average age was 44 years. 10% of patients undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy under AG (two) required pharmacological management with ephedrine or vasoactive agents to correct hemodynamic instability, while in the group in which RA was used 11% (one) required pharmacological management. The mean bleeding with AG was 526.75 ml while with AR it was 445.55 ml. The average pain at 30 minutes was 6 for AG and 5.4 AR, at 60 minutes it was 4.2 and 6.1, at 90 minutes it was 2 and 1.6, at 150 minutes it was O and 1.1, and finally at 180 minutes it was O for both techniques; The average dose of morphine used in the postoperative period corresponded to 3.9 mg with AG and 4.1 mg with RA. Abbreviations: AG, general anesthesia; AR, regional anesthesia; UCPA, post-anesthesia care unit; EV, intravenous.

1. Tessler MJ, Kardash K, Kleiman S, Rossignol M. A retrospective comparison of spinal and general anesthesia for vaginal hysterectomy: a time analysis. Anesth Analg 1995; 81: 694-6.

2. Watcha MF, White PF. Postoperative nausea and vomiting. Its etiology, treatment and prevention.

3. Standl T, Eckert S, Schulte J. Postoperative complaints after spinal and thiopentone-isoflurane anaesthesia in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scan 1996; 40: 222-6.

4. Mulroy MF, Willis RP. Spinal anaesthesia for outpatients: appropriate agents and techniques. J. Clin Anesth 1995; 7:622-7.

5. Derville MT, Lang CE. Time to discharge after general versus regional anaesthesia Br. J. Anaesth 1997, 78(Supp I) A3 (abstract).

6. Pain Clinic, St Richard's Hospital. Effectiveness of acute postoperative pain management: Evidence from published data.

7. Audit Commission. Anaesthesia under examination. Audit Commission, London, 1997. Carlsson P. Spinal anaesthesia in young patients using a 29 gauge needle: technical considerations and an evaluation of postoperative complaints compared with general anaesthesia. Br. J Anaesth 1990; 64: 178-82.

8. Wong J, FRCPC. Apinal anesthesia improves the early recovery profile of patients undergoing ambulatory knee arthroscopy. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia 48: 369-374.

9. T.Callesen, L.Schouenborg, D. Nielsen, H. Guldager and H, Kehlet. Combined espidural — spinal opiod-free anaesthesia and Analgesia for hysterectomy. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 82 (6) 881-5. 1999.

10. Thoren T, Sundberg A, Wattwill M, Garvill J-E. Jugensen U. Effects of epidural bupivacaine and epidural morphine on bowel function and pain after hysterectomy. Acta Anaesthesiol Scan 1989; 33: 181-5.

11. Rickford JK, Speedy HM, Tytler JA, Lim M. Comparative evaluation of general, epidural ans spinal anaesthesia for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1988; 70: 69-73.

12. Aldrete JA, Kroulik D. A postanesthetic recovery score. Anesthe Analg 1970; 49: 924-34.