• Jimmy Højberg Holm, Peter Bjørn Licht, Palle Toft, and Claus Andersen.
• Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark; OPEN, Open Patient data Explorative Network, Odense University Hospital, Region of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. Electronic address: jimmy.hoejberg.holm@rsyd.dk.
• J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 2022 Dec 1; 36 (12): 437843854378-4385.

ObjectiveThe risks and benefits of epidural analgesia have been studied extensively, but information regarding many other aspects of epidural catheter insertion is limited. The authors aimed to add information regarding procedural pain, procedure duration, failure rates, and the effect of experience to the ongoing discussion on this procedure.DesignA prospective observational study.SettingA Danish tertiary hospital.ParticipantsPatients scheduled to undergo video-assisted thoracic surgery.InterventionsEpidural catheter insertion in 173 patients undergoing video-assisted thoracic surgery for lung cancer.Measurements And Main ResultsThe authors recorded the time required for the epidural insertion procedure, the attempts used, insertion level, access use, patient position, placement technique used, and the designation of the physician placing the catheter. Furthermore, the authors asked the patients to evaluate the expected procedural pain, and after the procedure the authors asked them to evaluate the actual level of pain experienced. Six and 24 months after discharge, the authors examined persistent sequelae by using questionnaire assessments. The median procedure duration was 13 minutes, with 75% of the catheters placed within 22 minutes. Actual procedure-related pain (mean score [M] = 3.5, SD = 2.0) was significantly (p < 0.0001) less than that expected before the procedure (M = 4.9, SD = 2.0). The patients' expected pain, attempts required for successful catheter placement, and approach used to access the epidural space significantly affected the actual procedure-related pain (p = 0.001, p ≤ 0.003, and p = 0.023, respectively). Persistent pain and sensory disturbances were observed in 11% and 4% of the patients, respectively, after 6 months and in 6% and 4% of the patients, respectively, after 2 years.ConclusionsIn this study, the authors examined several lesser-known aspects of epidural procedures. The use of epidural analgesia as part of the pain management plan after surgery requires a more complex evaluation instead of merely discussing the possibility of procedural infections, hematomas, or neurologic injuries. The procedure time, patients' expected and experienced pain related to the procedure, and the potential long-term side effects should be a part of the decision-making process.Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

18 keywords...

hide…