title: Total intravenous anesthesia, spinal anesthesia or combined sciatic-femoral nerve block for outpatient knee arthroscopy.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to compare efficacy, efficiency and surgeon's satisfaction of total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil with those of spinal or peripheral nerve blocks for outpatient knee arthroscopy.
  
  
  METHODS
  One hundred and twenty patients undergoing elective outpatient knee arthroscopy were randomly allocated to receive total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil (40), combined sciatic-femoral nerve block (40), or spinal anesthesia (40). Preparation times, surgeon's satisfaction, and discharge times with the 3 anesthesia techniques were measured. Anesthesia-related costs were also compared based on costs of drugs, disposable materials, and anesthesia and nurse staff.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Preparation time was 13 min (8-22 min) with general anesthesia, 15 min (5-30 min) with spinal anesthesia and 15 min (5-25 min) with sciatic-femoral blocks (p=0.006). Surgeon's satisfaction was similar in the 3 groups, but 17 patients receiving peripheral nerve block (42%) and 12 receiving spinal anesthesia (30%) by-passed the postanesthesia care unit after surgery as compared with only 2 general anesthesia patients (5%) (p=0.01). Discharge from the postanesthesia care unit required 5 min (5-20 min) after peripheral block as compared with 15 min (5-25 min) with spinal and 15 min (5-80 min) with general anesthesia (p=0.005); however, stay in the Day-Surgery Unit was shorter after general anesthesia [170 (100-400) min] than peripheral [265 (110-485) min] or spinal blocks [230 (95-800) min] (p=0.026). Urinary retention was reported in 3 spinal patients only (8%) (p=0.03).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Regional anesthesia techniques reduce the rate of admission and the duration of stay in the postanesthesia care unit as compared with general anesthesia. Peripheral rather than spinal nerve blocks should be preferred to minimise the risk for urinary retention.
authors.affiliation: Department of Anesthesiology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Vita et Salute University, Milan, Italy. casati.andrea@hsr.it
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Casati
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Cappelleri
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Aldegheri
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Marchetti
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Messina
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: De Ponti
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000556:Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; D000771:Anesthesia, Intravenous; D000775:Anesthesia, Spinal; D018686:Anesthetics, Intravenous / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D001182:Arthroscopy; D005260:Female; D005267:Femoral Nerve; D006801:Humans; D007719:Knee Joint / Q000601:surgery*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009407:Nerve Block / Q000379:methods*; D010880:Piperidines / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D015742:Propofol / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D000077208:Remifentanil; D012584:Sciatic Nerve; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
chemical_list: D018686:Anesthetics, Intravenous; D010880:Piperidines; D000077208:Remifentanil; D015742:Propofol