There remains a role for neuraxial anesthesia for hip fracture surgery in the post-REGAIN era

2Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Two recent, large-scale, randomized controlled trials comparing neuraxial anesthesia with general anesthesia for patients undergoing surgical fixation of a hip fracture have sparked interest in the comparison of general and neuraxial anesthesia. These studies both reported non-superiority between general and neuraxial anesthesia in this patient cohort, yet they have limitations, like their sample size and use of composite outcomes. We worry that that if there is a perception among surgeons, nurses, patients and anesthesiologists that general and spinal anesthesia are equivalent (which is not what the authors of the studies conclude), it may become difficult to argue for the resources and training to provide neuraxial anesthesia to this patient population. In this daring discourse, we argue that despite the recent trials, there remain benefits of neuraxial anesthesia for patients who have suffered hip fractures and that abandoning offering neuraxial anesthesia to these patients would be an error.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stone, A. B., Poeran, J., & Memtsoudis, S. G. (2023). There remains a role for neuraxial anesthesia for hip fracture surgery in the post-REGAIN era. Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, 48(8), 430–432. https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2022-104071

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free