Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31828612›Full record

Observational studyAdvances in therapy2020

Factors Determining the Choice of Spinal Versus General Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Ambulatory Surgery: Results of a Multicenter Observational Study.

Xavier Capdevila, Christophe Aveline, Laurent Delaunay, Hervé Bouaziz, Paul Zetlaoui, Olivier Choquet, Laurent Jouffroy, Hélène Herman-Demars, Francis Bonnet

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Advances in therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02529501 (Factors Influencing the Choice of Anesthesia), which is not on this map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02529501 completednot on this map

Factors Influencing the Choice of Anesthesia (Spinal Anesthesia or Short General Anesthesia) in Outpatient Surgery

TypeobservationalSponsorNordic Pharma SASRan2015 to 2016Enrolled595ConditionsSpinal Anesthesia, Short General Anesthesia, Outpatient Surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Xavier CapdevilaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital and Inserm U1051, Montpellier NeuroSciences Institute, Montpellier, France. x-capdevila@chu-montpellier.fr.
Christophe AvelinePolyclinique, Cesson-Sévigné, France.
Laurent DelaunayClinique Générale, Annecy, France.
Hervé BouazizCHU, Nancy, France.
Paul ZetlaouiCHU, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, Paris, France.
Olivier ChoquetDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital and Inserm U1051, Montpellier NeuroSciences Institute, Montpellier, France.
Laurent JouffroyClinique des Diaconesses, Strasbourg, France.
Hélène Herman-DemarsNordic Pharma, Paris, France.
Francis BonnetHôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Institute for Neurosciences of Montpellier · FRBicêtre Hospital · FRCentre Hospitalier Annecy Genevois · FRCentre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Nancy · FRHôpital des Diaconesses · FRHôpital Privé Jean Mermo · FRNordic Pharma (France) · FRSorbonne Université · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAvailable short-acting intrathecal anesthetic agents (chloroprocaine and prilocaine) offer an alternative to general anesthesia for short-duration surgical procedures, especially ambulatory surgeries. Factors determining the choice of anesthesia for short-duration procedures have not been previously identified.

methodsThis observational, prospective, multicenter, cohort study was conducted between July 2015 and July 2016, in 33 private or public hospitals performing ambulatory surgery. The primary objective was to determine the factors influencing the choice of anesthetic technique (spinal or general anesthesia). Secondary outcomes included efficacy of the anesthesia, time to hospital discharge, and patient satisfaction.

resultsAmong 592 patients enrolled, 309 received spinal anesthesia and 283 underwent general anesthesia. In both study arms, the most frequently performed surgical procedures were orthopedic and urologic (43.3% and 30.7%, respectively); 66.1% of patients were free to choose their type of anesthesia, 21.8% chose one of the techniques because they were afraid of the other, 16.8% based their choice on the expected ease of recovery, 19.2% considered their degree of anxiety/stress, and 16.9% chose the technique on the basis of its efficacy. The median times to micturition and to unassisted ambulation were significantly shorter in the general anesthesia arm compared with the spinal anesthesia arm (225.5 [98; 560] min vs. 259.0 [109; 789] min; p = 0.0011 and 215.0 [30; 545] min vs. 240.0 [40; 1420]; p = 0.0115, respectively). The median time to hospital discharge was equivalent in both study arms. In the spinal anesthesia arm, patients who received chloroprocaine and prilocaine recovered faster than patients who received bupivacaine. The time to ambulation and the time to hospital discharge were shorter (p < 0.001). The overall success rate of spinal anesthesia was 91.6%, and no significant difference was observed between chloroprocaine, prilocaine, and bupivacaine. The patients' global satisfaction with anesthesia and surgery was over 90% in both study arms.

conclusionsPatient's choice, patient fear of the alternative technique, patient stress/anxiety, the expected ease of recovery, and the efficacy of the technique were identified as the main factors influencing patient choice of short-acting local anesthesia or general anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia with short-acting local anesthetics was preferred to general anesthesia in ambulatory surgeries and was associated with a high degree of patient satisfaction.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02529501. Registered on June 23, 2015. Date of enrollment of the first participant July 21, 2015.

Indexed as

AdultAmbulatory Surgical ProceduresAnesthesia, GeneralAnesthesia, SpinalAnesthetics, LocalBupivacaineCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionProcaineProspective StudiesTime FactorsAnesthetics, LocalBupivacainechloroprocaineProcaineAmbulatory surgeryBupivacaineChloroprocaineGeneral anesthesiaPrilocaineSpinal anesthesia

Identifiers

PMID31828612
PMCPMC6979445
OpenAlexW2996071578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.