↓ Skip to main content

Spinal versus general anaesthesia in surgery for inguinodynia (SPINASIA trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Spinal versus general anaesthesia in surgery for inguinodynia (SPINASIA trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Trials, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-016-1746-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Willem A. R. Zwaans, Léon H. P. M. le Mair, Marc R. M. Scheltinga, Rudi M. H. Roumen

Abstract

Chronic inguinodynia (groin pain) is a common complication following open inguinal hernia repair or a Pfannenstiel incision but may also be experienced after other types of (groin) surgery. If conservative treatments are to no avail, tailored remedial surgery, including a neurectomy and/or a (partial) meshectomy, may be considered. Retrospective studies in patients with chronic inguinodynia suggested that spinal anaesthesia is superior compared to general anaesthesia in terms of pain relief following remedial operations. This randomised controlled trial is designed to study the effect of type of anaesthesia (spinal or general) on pain relief following remedial surgery for inguinodynia. A total of 190 adult patients who suffer from unacceptable chronic (more than 3 months) inguinodynia, as subjectively judged by the patients themselves, are included. Only patients scheduled to undergo a neurectomy and/or a meshectomy by an open approach are considered for inclusion and randomised to spinal or general anaesthesia. Patients are excluded if pain is attributable to abdominal causes or if any contraindications for either type of anaesthesia are present. Primary outcome is effect of type of anaesthesia on pain relief. Secondary outcomes include patient satisfaction, quality of life, use of analgesics and (in)direct medical costs. Patient follow-up period is one year. The first patient was included in January 2016. The expected trial deadline is December 2019. Potential effects are deemed related to the entire setting of type of anaesthesia. Since any setting is multifactorial, all of these factors may influence the outcome measures. This is the first large randomised controlled trial comparing the two most frequently used anaesthetic techniques in remedial surgery for groin pain. There is a definite need for evidence-based strategies to optimise results of these types of surgery. Besides pain relief, other important patient-related outcome measures are assessed to include patient's perspectives on outcome. The protocol (protocol number NL54115.015.15 ) is approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands. The study protocol was registered at www.trialregister.nl (NTR registration number: 5586) on 15 January 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 9%
Other 4 7%
Student > Master 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Professor 2 4%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 26 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Unspecified 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 27 49%