Epidural Versus Local Anesthesia for Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Systematic Review.

To examine the impact of anesthesia type on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complications after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD).

A significant advantage of PELD involves the option to use alternative sedation to general anesthesia (GA). Two options include local anesthesia (LA) and epidural anesthesia (EA). While EA is more involved, it may yield improved pain control and surgical results compared with LA. However, few studies have directly examined outcomes for PELD after LA versus EA, and it remains unknown which technique results in superior outcomes.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases examining PELD performed with LA or EA from inception to August 16, 2021 were conducted. All studies reported greater than 6 months of follow-up in addition to PRO data. PROs, including visual analog scale (VAS)-leg/back, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were collected. Complications, recurrent disk herniation, durotomy, and reoperation rates, as well as surgical data, were recorded. All outcomes were compared between pooled studies examining LA or EA.

Fifty-six studies consisting of 4465 patients (366 EA, 4099 LA) were included. Overall complication rate, durotomy rate, length of stay, recurrent disk herniation, and reoperation rates were similar between groups. VAS back/leg and ODI scores were all significantly improved at the first and last follow-up appointments in the LA group. VAS leg and ODI scores were significantly improved at the first and last follow-up appointments in the EA group, but VAS back was not.

EA can be a safe and feasible alternative to LA, potentially minimizing patient discomfort during PELD. Conclusions are limited by a high level of study bias and heterogeneity. Further investigation is necessary to determine if PELD under EA may have greater short-term PRO benefits compared with LA.