Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Regional anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia, morbidity and mortality.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Gulur, P; Nishimori, M; Ballantyne, JC
Published in: Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol
June 2006

The regional versus general anaesthesia debate is an age-old debate that has brought about few clear answers. Most concur that multiple factors including the patient, the surgery, the method of regional and general anaesthesia, and the quality of perioperative care, all influence surgical outcome. In this age of evidence-based medicine, the heterogenous data available need to be reconciled with the advances in perioperative care and the significant decline in complications associated with the surgical process as a whole. This review considers general issues such as the type of available evidence, and its limitations, particularly with regard to the relatively broad question of neuraxial versus general anaesthesia. It then assesses current evidence on regional versus general anaesthesia for specific scenarios such as hip fracture surgery, carotid endarterectomy, Caesarean section, ambulatory orthopaedic surgery, and postoperative cognitive dysfunction in elderly patients after non-cardiac surgery.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol

DOI

ISSN

1753-3740

Publication Date

June 2006

Volume

20

Issue

2

Start / End Page

249 / 263

Location

Netherlands

Related Subject Headings

  • Postoperative Complications
  • Morbidity
  • Meta-Analysis as Topic
  • Humans
  • Hip Fractures
  • Endarterectomy, Carotid
  • Clinical Trials as Topic
  • Cesarean Section
  • Anesthesiology
  • Anesthesia, General
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Gulur, P., Nishimori, M., & Ballantyne, J. C. (2006). Regional anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia, morbidity and mortality. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol, 20(2), 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpa.2005.10.002
Gulur, Padma, Mina Nishimori, and Jane C. Ballantyne. “Regional anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia, morbidity and mortality.Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 20, no. 2 (June 2006): 249–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpa.2005.10.002.
Gulur P, Nishimori M, Ballantyne JC. Regional anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia, morbidity and mortality. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2006 Jun;20(2):249–63.
Gulur, Padma, et al. “Regional anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia, morbidity and mortality.Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol, vol. 20, no. 2, June 2006, pp. 249–63. Pubmed, doi:10.1016/j.bpa.2005.10.002.
Gulur P, Nishimori M, Ballantyne JC. Regional anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia, morbidity and mortality. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2006 Jun;20(2):249–263.
Journal cover image

Published In

Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol

DOI

ISSN

1753-3740

Publication Date

June 2006

Volume

20

Issue

2

Start / End Page

249 / 263

Location

Netherlands

Related Subject Headings

  • Postoperative Complications
  • Morbidity
  • Meta-Analysis as Topic
  • Humans
  • Hip Fractures
  • Endarterectomy, Carotid
  • Clinical Trials as Topic
  • Cesarean Section
  • Anesthesiology
  • Anesthesia, General