ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2021
Efficacy, safety, and reliability of surgery on the lumbar spine under general versus spinal anesthesia- an analysis of 64 cases.
Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative outcomes of awake spine surgery under spinal versus general anesthesia: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Pooled it
- Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Lumbar Discectomy: Patient-Centered Analysis of Satisfaction with Anesthesia Service.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Spinal Anesthesia Results in Lower Costs Compared to General Anesthesia for Patients Undergoing Lumbar Fusion-A Matched Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Spinal anesthesia for L5-S1 interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy: a retrospective study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Perioperative outcomes of general versus spinal anesthesia in the lumbar spine surgery population: A systematic review and meta-analysis of data from 2005 through 2021.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2022Review
- Increasing relevance of minimally invasive spinal surgery.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN PURPOSE: Compare intra and postoperative parameters, surgeons' satisfaction, and cost-effectiveness between general anesthesia (GA) and spinal anesthesia (SA) on patients undergoing surgery in the lumbar spine surgery. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Surgery on the lumbar spine is the commonest surgical procedure among all spinal surgical practices. Both the GA and SA are shown to be suitable techniques for performing the surgery safely. GA is used most frequently. But, SA became increasingly more popular because it allows the patient to self-position thereby reducing various complications associated with GA in a prone position.
methodsA total of 64 patients from June 2016 to July 2019 who underwent either discectomy, laminectomy, or lamino-foraminotomy for herniated lumbar disc or canal stenosis in 1 or 2 levels were included. During the study period, 32 patients were non-randomly selected for each of the GA and SA groups. The heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), blood loss, total anesthetic time, surgeons' satisfaction, analgesic requirements, cost of the procedure, and hospital stay were recorded and compared.
resultsIn the context of demographic characteristics, baseline HR, or MAP, no significant differences were noted between SA and GA groups. Mean anesthetic time, mean PACU time, mean doses of analgesic requirement, cost of anesthesia, and the surgeon's satisfaction was significantly lower in the SA Group (P < 0.05). The blood loss, duration of operation, and hospital stay were not significant too. No major Intra and postoperative complications were reported nor were significant differences found in either series.
conclusionSafety and efficacy of SA in comparison to GA were similar for the patients undergoing surgery on the lumbar spine. Notable advantages of SA include shorter anesthesia duration, fewer drug requirements, relative cost-effectiveness, and fewer complications rate. Successful surgery can be performed using either anesthesia type.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.