Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Combined spinal and general anesthesia vs general anesthesia for robotic sacrocervicopexy: a randomized controlled trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Gynecologic laparoscopic surgery is frequently accompanied by early postoperative pain. This study assessed the effect of combined general and spinal anesthesia on postoperative pain score, analgesic use, and patient satisfaction following robotic surgeries.

Methods

This was a randomized controlled trial. Thirty-eight consecutive women who underwent robotic surgeries for pelvic organ prolapse (sacrocolpopexy with or without subtotal hysterectomy) were randomly assigned to receive general anesthesia (control group, n = 20) or combined general with spinal anesthesia (study group, n = 18). Pain scores were assessed at rest and while coughing using a visual analog scale (VAS) 0–10. Dosage of analgesic medication consumption was retrieved from patients’ charts.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups with respect to demographic data and intraoperative hemodynamic parameters. In the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) mean total IV morphine and meperidine dosages were significantly lower for the study than the control group (0.33 vs 7.59 mg, 1.39 vs 27.89 mg, respectively, P < 0.003, <0.001, respectively). In addition, a significantly lower percentage of patients belonging to the study group demanded analgesic medications while in the PACU (33 vs 53 %, P = 0.042). Pain scores in the PACU and during postoperative day 1 were significantly lower in the study group than in the control group (delta VAS 1.9 vs 3.0, P = 0.04). Satisfaction with pain treatment among both patients and nurses was significantly higher in the study group.

Conclusions

Reported levels of pain and analgesic use during the first 24 h following robotic gynecologic surgery were significantly lower following general and spinal anesthesia compared to general anesthesia alone.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L et al (2004) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 104:805–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Siddiqui NY, Geller EJ, Visco AG (2012) Symptomatic and anatomic 1-year outcomes after robotic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 206(5):435.e1–435.e5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ekstein P, Szold A, Sagie B, Werbin N, Klausner JM, Weinbroum AA (2006) Laparoscopic surgery may be associated with severe pain and high analgesia requirements in the immediate postoperative period. Ann Surg 243:41–46

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Van Glabeke E, Mandron E, Desrez G, Chartier-Kastler E, Conort P, Richard F (1998) Review on the use of CO2 in laparoscopy surgery. Prog Urol 8:586–589

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Berberoğlu M, Dilek ON, Ercan F, Kati I, Ozmen M (1998) The effect of CO2 insufflation rate on the postlaparoscopic shoulder pain. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 8:273–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gupta AM, Kawanishi H (1992) Post-laparoscopic peritoneal irritation. Gastrointest Endosc 38:103–104

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Luchetti M, Palomba R, Sica G, Massa G, Tufano R (1996) Effectiveness and safety of combined epidural and general anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Reg Anesth 21:465–469

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kong SK, Onsiong SM, Chiu WK, Li MK (2002) Use of intrathecal morphine for postoperative pain relief after elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Anaesthesia 57:1168–1173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Alessandri F, Lijoi D, Mistrangelo E, Nicoletti A, Ragni N (2006) Effect of presurgical local infiltration of levobupivacaine in the surgical field on postsurgical wound pain in laparoscopic gynecological surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 85:844–849

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, Chen CC, Barber MD (2011) Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 118:1005–1013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Katz J, Melzack R (1999) Measurement of pain. Surg Clin North Am 79:231–252

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bø K et al (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:10–17

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Segal D, Assalia A, Weissman A, Edry R (2011) Post-operative pain relief following laparoscopic abdominal surgery: general anesthesia versus combination with regional anesthesia using intrathecal morphine and fentanyl. Eur J Anaesthesiol 28:201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mueller ER, Kenton K, Tarnay C et al (2012) Abdominal colpopexy: comparison of endoscopic surgical strategies (ACCESS). Contemp Clin Trials 33:1011–1018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rodanant O, Sirichotewithayakorn P, Sriprajittichai P, Charuluxananan S (2003) An optimal dose study of intrathecal morphine in gynecological patients. J Med Assoc Thai 86:S331–S337

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bang-Vojdanovski B (1991) Intrathecal opiate-spinal anesthesia. Clinical results of a 1-year study using 0.0375-0.15 mg morphine. Reg Anaesth 14:47–51

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Carlsson AM (1983) Assessment of chronic pain. I. Aspects of the reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale. Pain 16:87–101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wu Z, Kong M, Wang N, Finlayson RJ, De Tran QH (2012) Intravenous butorphanol administration reduces intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus after cesarean delivery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Anesth 26:752–757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lior Lowenstein.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Segal, D., Awad, N., Nasir, H. et al. Combined spinal and general anesthesia vs general anesthesia for robotic sacrocervicopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J 25, 369–374 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2194-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2194-8

Keywords

Navigation