Effects of regional versus general anesthesia on outcomes after total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective propensity-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND Many orthopaedic surgical procedures can be performed with either regional or general anesthesia. We hypothesized that total hip arthroplasty with regional anesthesia is associated with less postoperative morbidity and mortality than total hip arthroplasty with general anesthesia. METHODS This retrospective propensity-matched cohort study utilizing the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database included patients who had undergone total hip arthroplasty from 2007 through 2011. After matching, logistic regression was used to determine the association between the type of anesthesia and deep surgical site infections, hospital length of stay, thirty-day mortality, and cardiovascular and pulmonary complications. RESULTS Of 12,929 surgical procedures, 5103 (39.5%) were performed with regional anesthesia. The adjusted odds for deep surgical site infections were significantly lower in the regional anesthesia group than in the general anesthesia group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.20 to 0.72; p < 0.01). The hospital length of stay (geometric mean) was decreased by 5% (95% CI = 3% to 7%; p < 0.001) with regional anesthesia, which translates to 0.17 day for each total hip arthroplasty. Regional anesthesia was also associated with a 27% decrease in the odds of prolonged hospitalization (OR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.89; p < 0.001). The mortality rate was not significantly lower with regional anesthesia (OR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.42; p > 0.05). The adjusted odds for cardiovascular complications (OR = 0.61; 95% CI = 0.44 to 0.85) and respiratory complications (OR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.81) were all lower in the regional anesthesia group. CONCLUSIONS Compared with general anesthesia, regional anesthesia for total hip arthroplasty was associated with a reduction in deep surgical site infection rates, hospital length of stay, and rates of postoperative cardiovascular and pulmonary complications. These findings could have an important medical and economic impact on health-care practice.

Susceptibility of enamel to initial erosion in relation to tooth type, tooth surface and enamel depth

This study aimed at assessing the susceptibility of different tooth types (molar/premolar), surfaces (buccal/lingual) and enamel depths (100, 200, 400 and 600 μm) to initial erosion measured by surface microhardness loss (ΔSMH) and calcium (Ca) release. Twenty molars and 20 premolars were divided into experimental and control groups, cut into lingual/ buccal halves, and ground/polished, removing 100 μm of enamel. The initial surface microhardness (SMH 0 ) was measured on all halves. The experimental group was subjected to 3 consecutive erosive challenges (30 ml/tooth of 1% citric acid, pH 3.6, 25 ° C, 1 min). After each challenge, ΔSMH and Ca release were measured. The same teeth were consecutively ground to 200, 400 and 600 μm depths, and the experimental group underwent 3 erosive challenges at each depth. No difference was found in SMH 0 between experimental and control groups. Multivariate nonparametric ANOVA showed no significant differences between lingual and buccal surfaces in ΔSMH (p = 0.801) or Ca release (p = 0.370). ΔSMH was significantly greater in premolars than in molars (p < 0.05), but not different with respect to enamel depth. Ca release decreased significantly with increasing depth. Regression between Ca release and ΔSMH at 100 μm depth showed lower slope and r 2 value, associated with greater Ca release values. At 200-600 μm depths, moderately large r 2 values were observed (0.651-0.830). In conclusion, different teeth and enamel depths have different susceptibility to erosion, so when Ca release is used to measure erosion, the depth of the test facet in enamel should be standardized, whereas this is less important if ΔSMH is used.