Anestesia neuroaxial comparada à anestesia geral para revascularização dos membros inferiores em idosos: revisão sistemática com metanálise de ensaios clínicos aleatórios

• Autor(a) principal: Barbosa, Fabiano Timbó
• Data de Publicação: 2009
• Outros Autores: Jucá, Mário Jorge, Castro, Aldemar Araujo [UNIFESP]
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
• Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-70942009000200012; http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/4959
• topic: ANESTHETIC TECHNIQUES; SURGERY; CIRURGIA; TÉCNICAS ANESTÉSICAS

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Currently, it is controversial on whether neuroaxis block (NB) is more effective than general anesthesia (GA) in elderly individuals undergoing non-cardiac surgeries. The objective of this study was to determine the efficiency of NB in comparison to GA for revascularization of the lower limbs (RLL) in the elderly. METHODS: A search of the following data base was conducted: MEDLINE (1955 to 2007), CINHAL (1982 to 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 2007), LILACS (1982 to 2007), and ISI (1945 to 2007). Two investigators undertook an independent analysis of the studies published to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing NB with GA for RLL. The full text of the RCTs that fulfill the inclusion criteria was analyzed. Disagreements were analyzed in consensus meetings. The software Review Manager was used for the Metanalysis by means of odds ratio with a confidence interval of 95%. RESULTS: Three studies involving 465 patients were selected. Metanalysis of the following parameters did not show statistically significant differences: mortality (OR: 0.90; CI 95%: 0.30-2.73; p = 0.85 for spinal anesthesia; OR: 1.30, CI 95%: 0.38-4.48, p = 0.68, for epidural block); myocardial infarction (OR: 1.38, CI 95%: 0.29-6.46, p = 0.68); and rate of lower limb amputation (OR: 0.81, CI 95%: 0.30-2.19, p = 0.68, for spinal block; OR: 0.70, CI 95%: 0.24-2.07, p = 0.52 for epidural block). A statistically significant difference was observed for pneumonia (OR: 0.37, CI 95%: 0.15-0.89, p = 0.03); however, clinical heterogeneity was present. CONCLUSIONS: This metanalysis did not generate enough evidence to demonstrate that NB is more efficient, equivalent, or less efficient than GA for RLL in the elderly.