Does Supplemental Epidural Anesthesia Improve Outcomes of Acetabular Fracture Surgery?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Addition of epidural anesthesia to general anesthesia is theorized to reduce hospital length of stay, improve postoperative pain control, reduce time to mobilization, and reduce intraoperative blood loss for operative treatment of acetabular fractures. Our hypothesis was that epidural anesthesia would result in improvement in short-term outcomes and therefore justify any associated increases in anesthesia induction time, treatment costs, or risks. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control. SETTING: Academic trauma center. PATIENTS: We identified 163 patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation of posterior wall acetabular fractures from 2002 through 2007. We excluded patients who were intubated before the procedure (n = 20) and patients with incomplete intraoperative anesthesia records (n = 5). Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 received combined epidural plus general anesthesia (CEGA) (n = 64) and Group 2 received general anesthesia alone (GA) (n = 74). No differences were observed between the two groups in terms of age, gender, Injury Severity Score, head Abbreviated Injury Score, mechanism of injury, number of associated fractures, number of comorbidities, or delay between injury and day of surgery. INTERVENTION: General anesthesia with or without epidural anesthesia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Length of stay, postanesthesia care unit initial and discharge pain scores, time to mobilization with physical therapy, estimated blood loss, and anesthesia time. RESULTS: : No significant differences were shown between the two groups for length of stay (CEGA, 6.2 days; GA, 5.9 days; P = 0.62; 80% power to detect a difference of 1.3 days), postanesthesia care unit initial pain scores (CEGA, 3.5; GA, 3.4; P = 0.92), postanesthesia care unit discharge pain scores (CEGA, 2.5; GA, 3.3; P = 0.13), or time to mobilization with physical therapy (CEGA, 1.5 days; GA, 1.7 days; P = 0.43). Intraoperative blood loss was less in the CEGA group (CEGA, 458 mL; GA, 543 mL; P = 0.05). Mean anesthesia time was longer for the CEGA group (CEGA, 85 minutes; GA, 66 minutes; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although addition of epidural anesthesia added an average of 19 minutes to the anesthesia time (P < 0.01), we found no advantage to CEGA regarding length of stay, pain scores, or time to rehabilitation. Mean decrease of blood loss of less than 100 mL in the CEGA group is unlikely to be of clinical significance. Our results contrast findings in support of CEGA in the hip arthroplasty literature and question the use of CEGA for posterior wall acetabular fractures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".