A comparison of regional and general anaesthesia for total replacement of the hip or knee: a meta-analysis

J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Jul;91(7):935-42. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B7.21538.


We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the relative efficacy of regional and general anaesthesia in patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement. A comprehensive search for relevant studies was performed in PubMed (1966 to April 2008), EMBASE (1969 to April 2008) and the Cochrane Library. Only randomised studies comparing regional and general anaesthesia for total hip or knee replacement were included. We identified 21 independent, randomised clinical trials. A random-effects model was used to calculate all effect sizes. Pooled results from these trials showed that regional anaesthesia reduces the operating time (odds ratio (OR) -0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.33 to -0.05), the need for transfusion (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.94) and the incidence of thromboembolic disease (deep-vein thrombosis OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.84; pulmonary embolism OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.80). Regional anaesthesia therefore seems to improve the outcome of patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Meta-Analysis
  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Anesthesia, Conduction / adverse effects
  • Anesthesia, Conduction / statistics & numerical data*
  • Anesthesia, General / adverse effects
  • Anesthesia, General / statistics & numerical data*
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods*
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / methods*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Length of Stay / statistics & numerical data
  • Male
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Treatment Outcome