• Aisling Ní Eochagáin, Barry N Singleton, Aneurin Moorthy, and Donal J Buggy.
• Department of Anaesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, Mater University Hospital, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. Electronic address: aislingnie@gmail.com.
• Br J Anaesth. 2022 Oct 1; 129 (4): 598-611.

BackgroundWhilst general anaesthesia is commonly used to undertake spine surgery, the use of neuraxial and peripheral regional anaesthesia techniques for intraoperative and postoperative analgesia is an evolving practice. Variations in practice have meant that it is difficult to know which modalities achieve optimal outcomes for patients undergoing spinal surgery. Our objective was to identify available evidence on the use of regional and neuraxial anaesthesia techniques for adult patients undergoing spinal surgery.MethodsThis study was conducted using a framework for scoping reviews. This included a search of six databases searching for articles published since January 1980. We included studies that involved adult patients undergoing spinal surgery with regional or neuraxial techniques used as the primary anaesthesia method or as part of an analgesic strategy.ResultsSeventy-eight articles were selected for final review. All original papers were included, including case reports, case series, clinical trials, or conference publications. We found that general anaesthesia remains the most common anaesthesia technique for this patient cohort. However, regional anaesthesia, especially non-neuraxial techniques such as fascial plane blocks, is an emerging practice and may have a role in terms of improving postoperative pain relief, quality of recovery, and patient satisfaction. In comparison with neuraxial techniques, the popularity of fascial plane blocks for spinal surgery has significantly increased since 2017.ConclusionsRegional and neuraxial anaesthesia techniques have been used both to provide analgesia and anaesthesia for patients undergoing spinal surgery. Outcome metrics for the success of these techniques vary widely and more frequently use physiological outcome metrics more than patient-centred ones.Copyright © 2022 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

20 keywords...

hide…