EP3.15 Anesthetic Technique in Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review of General versus Neuraxial Approaches

Clicks: 10
ID: 331313
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #320 of 444 articles by views in Journal of hip preservation surgery

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 444 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Hip arthroscopy is increasingly performed for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). While general anesthesia (GA) is most commonly used, neuraxial anesthesia (NA) has been proposed as an alternative. Evidence specific to hip arthroscopy remains limited and heterogeneous. Purpose To compare general and neuraxial anesthesia for hip arthroscopy with respect to perioperative outcomes, complications, and efficiency metrics. Methods A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Scopus were searched from January 2016 to March 2026. Comparative studies evaluating GA versus NA in adult patients undergoing hip arthroscopy were included. Data were extracted using a standardized form and risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Findings were synthesized qualitatively given anticipated clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Results Five retrospective comparative studies were included, with sample sizes ranging from 58 to 240 patients. Neuraxial anesthesia was associated with lower immediate postoperative pain scores (median 5.2 vs 6.2); and reduced opioid consumption in the PACU (6.0 vs 8.1 mg), although one study reported no statistically significant differences. Findings related to perioperative efficiency were heterogeneous. Some studies demonstrated shorter early recovery times with neuraxial anesthesia, while others reported no difference or longer total perioperative time related to anesthesia preparation. No consistent differences were reported between anesthesia types in longer-term functional outcomes, complication rates, or need for subsequent surgery. Urinary retention was more frequently reported with neuraxial anesthesia in one study. Conclusion Neuraxial anesthesia may provide improved immediate postoperative analgesia and reduced opioid requirements following hip arthroscopy, without compromising longer-term outcomes. Its impact on perioperative efficiency is variable, and the existing evidence base is limited to small retrospective studies at moderate-to-high risk of bias. Neuraxial anesthesia represents a reasonable alternative to general anesthesia where early analgesia and opioid-sparing are prioritized, though prospective comparative trials are needed to define its role.
Reference Key
openalex_W7220437259 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Céline Guirguis, Robert DiCesare, Robert Koucheki, Aazad Abbas, Jas Chahal, Tyler Hauer
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Journal of hip preservation surgery
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jhps/hnag043.300
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jhps/hnag043.300
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.