A comparison of regional and general anaesthesia for total replacement of the hip or knee: A meta-analysis

202Citations
Citations of this article
149Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the relative efficacy of regional and general anaesthesia in patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement. A comprehensive search for relevant studies was performed in PubMed (1966 to April 2008), EMBASE (1969 to April 2008) and the Cochrane Library. Only randomised studies comparing regional and general anaesthesia for total hip or knee replacement were included. We identified 21 independent, randomised clinical trials. A random-effects model was used to calculate all effect sizes. Pooled results from these trials showed that regional anaesthesia reduces the operating time (odds ratio (OR) -0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.33 to -0.05), the need for transfusion (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.94) and the incidence of thromboembolic disease (deep-vein thrombosis OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.84; pulmonary embolism OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.80). Regional anaesthesia therefore seems to improve the outcome of patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement. ©2009 British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hu, S., Zhang, Z. Y., Hua, Y. Q., Li, J., & Cai, Z. D. (2009). A comparison of regional and general anaesthesia for total replacement of the hip or knee: A meta-analysis. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - Series B, 91(7), 935–942. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.91B7.21538

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