Skip to Content
Authors Black MJ, Ruscher AE, Lederman J, Chen H
Author Profile(s)
Journal Ann. Surg. Oncol. Volume: 14 Issue: 2 Pages: 744-9
Publish Date 2007 Feb
PubMed ID 17122989
Abstract

Minimally invasive parathyroidectomy (MIP) under local/cervical block anesthesia (LA) is safe and effective for patients with primary hyperparathyroidism (HPT). Advantages of LA versus general anesthesia (GA) for these focused procedures have not been clearly demonstrated.Between 3/01 and 6/04, 177 consecutive patients with primary HPT and positive localization studies underwent MIP. Seventy-three (41%) had surgery under LA while 104 (59%) had GA. Primary endpoints were IV narcotic use, anti-emetic use, nausea, vomiting, and post-operative pain.Patients who had parathyroidectomy under LA were older (64 +/- 2 vs. 57 +/- 2 years, P = 0.001). Cure and complication rates were identical between the two groups. Patients who had parathyroidectomy under LA required less IV narcotic pain mediation (mean morphine equivalents 11.4 +/- 1.3 mg vs. 22.5 +/- 1.1 mg; P < 0.001) compared to GA patients. The LA patients had better pain control as shown by lower post-operative peak pain scores (2.9 +/- 0.3 vs. 5.0 +/- 0.4; P < 0.001) and lower overall pain scores (mean 1.9 +/- 0.2 vs. 3.1 +/- 0.2; P < 0.001). The LA group required fewer anti-emetic medications compared to the GA patients (mean 0.4 +/- 0.1 vs. 1.7 +/- 0.1 doses; P < 0.001). Fewer LA patients experienced post-operative nausea (16% vs. 49%; P < 0.001), and vomiting (7% vs. 24%; P = 0.002). Length of stay was similar between the groups (0.4 +/- 0 vs. 0.3 +/- 0; P = 0.22).In this study the choice of anesthesia did not affect surgical cure rate, morbidity, or length of stay. LA was associated with significantly lower post-operative pain, nausea, and vomiting. LA appears to offer specific advantages more than GA for patients undergoing MIP.

webmaster@surgery.wisc.edu Copyright © 2016 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System