Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Cell Procurement

Comparison of general vs regional anaesthesia for BM harvesting: a retrospective study of anaesthesia-related complications

Bone Marrow Transplantation volume 45, pages 53–61 (2010)Cite this article

Abstract

This retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the safety and complications profile of general anaesthesia (GA) compared with that of regional anaesthesia (RA) for BM harvesting (BMH). The study included 281 donations carried out between 1992 and 1999. Of these, 204 (73%) were allogeneic donations, and GA was carried out in 69% (140 of 204) and RA in 31% (64 of 204) of cases. The other 77 donations were autologous (27%), using GA in 87% (67 of 77) and RA in 13% (10 of 77) of cases. No life-threatening complications occurred, but there were minor intra- and postoperative events during 26 (9%) and after 58 (21%) donations. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was reported in 40 (14%) cases and post-spinal headache after five out of 58 (8.6%) donations in which spinal anaesthesia was carried out. The incidence of intra- and postoperative events did not differ significantly between the GA and RA groups. However, the incidence of postoperative events was higher in the allogeneic group compared with that in the autologous group (25 vs 10%, P<0.01) and in female donors compared with male donors (29 vs 14%, P=0.002). In conclusion, both GA and RA are comparable with regard to BMH. Nevertheless, non-severe intra- and postoperative events were frequent.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Buckner CD, Clift RA, Sanders JE, Stewart P, Bensinger WI, Doney KC et al. Marrow harvesting from normal donors. Blood 1984; 64: 630–634.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bortin MM, Buckner CD . Major complications of marrow harvesting for transplantation. Exp Hematol 1983; 11: 916–921.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Stroncek DF, Holland PV, Bartch G, Bixby T, Simmons RG, Antin JH et al. Experiences of the first 493 unrelated marrow donors in the National Marrow Donor Program. Blood 1993; 81: 1940–1946.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lavi A, Efrat R, Feigin E, Kadari A . Regional versus general anesthesia for bone marrow harvesting. J Clin Anesth 1993; 5: 204–206.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Knudsen LM, Johnsen HE, Gaarsdal E, Jensen L . Spinal versus general anaesthesia for bone marrow harvesting (letter). Bone Marrow Transplant 1995; 15: 486–487.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Burmeister MA, Standl T, Brauer P, Ramsperger K, Kroger N, Zander A et al. Safety and efficacy of spinal vs general anaesthesia in bone marrow harvesting. Bone Marrow Transplant 1998; 21: 1145–1148.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mingus ML . Recovery advantages of regional anesthesia compared with general anesthesia: adult patients. J Clin Anesth 1995; 7: 628–633.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gulur P, Nishimori M, Ballantyne JC . Regional anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia, morbidity and mortality. Best Practice Res Clin Anaesth 2006; 20: 249–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rasmussen LS, Johnson T, Kuipers HM, Kristensen D, Siersma VD, Vila P et al. Does anaesthesia cause postoperative cognitive dysfunction? A randomised study of regional versus general anaesthesia in 438 elderly patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2003; 47: 260–266.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Salonia A, Crescenti A, Suardi N, Memmo A, Naspro R, Bocciardi AM et al. General versus spinal anesthesia in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy: results of a prospective, randomized study. Urology 2004; 64: 95–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schuricht AL, McCarthy CS, Wells WL, Kumor RJ, Cwik J . A comparison of epidural versus general anesthesia for outpatient endoscopic preperitoneal herniorrhaphy. JSLS 1997; 1: 141–144.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Urwin SC, Parker MJ, Griffiths R . General versus regional anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Br J Anaesth 2000; 84: 450–455.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jellish WS, Thalji Z, Stevenson K, Shea J . A prospective randomized study comparing short- and intermediate-term perioperative outcome variables after spinal or general anesthesia for lumbar disk and laminectomy surgery. Anesth Analg 1996; 83: 559–564.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McLain RF, Kalfas I, Bell GR, Tetzlaff JE, Yoon HJ, Rana M . Comparison of spinal and general anesthesia in lumbar laminectomy surgery: a case-controlled analysis of 400 patients. J Neurosurg Spine 2005; 2: 17–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Filshie J, Pollock AN, Hughes RG, Omar YA . The anaesthetic management of bone marrow harvest for transplantation. Anaesthesia 1984; 39: 480–484.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Heldal D, Brinch L, Tjonnfjord G, Solheim BG, Egeland T, Gadeholt G et al. Donation of stem cells from blood or bone marrow: results of a randomised study of safety and complaints. Bone Marrow Transplant 2002; 29: 479–486.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gandini A, Roata C, Franchini M, Agostini E, Guizzardi E, Pontiero Giacometti P et al. Unrelated allogeneic bone marrow donation: short- and long-term follow-up of 103 consecutive volunteer donors. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001; 28: 369–374.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Jin NR, Hill RS, Petersen FB, Buckner CD, Stewart PS, Amos D et al. Marrow harvesting for autologous marrow transplantation. Exp Hematol 1985; 13: 879–884.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Weir I, Holmes HI, Young ER . Venous sequelae following venipuncture and intravenous diazepam administration. Part one: etiological factors. Oral Health 1996; 86: 9–17.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Weir I, Holmes HI, Young ER . Venous Sequelae. Part 2: other influencing factors and techniques for dealing with the problem. Oral Health 1996; 87: 31–38.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Tammela T . Postoperative urinary retention—why the patient cannot void. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1995; 29 (Suppl 175): 75–77.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Keita H, Diouf E, Tubach F, Brouwer T, Dahmani S, Mantz J et al. Predictive factors of early postoperative urinary retention in the post anesthesia care unit. Anesth Analg 2005; 101: 592–596.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the nursing staff at the Departments of Anaesthesiology, Haematology and Transplantation surgery for their excellent patient care and Ms Hanna Svensson for statistical advice.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Haematology, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden

    M Machaczka, E Kalaitzakis, P Ljungman & H Hägglund

  2. Department of Anaesthesiology, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden

    L Eleborg

Authors
  1. M Machaczka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E Kalaitzakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L Eleborg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P Ljungman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. H Hägglund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H Hägglund.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Machaczka, M., Kalaitzakis, E., Eleborg, L. et al. Comparison of general vs regional anaesthesia for BM harvesting: a retrospective study of anaesthesia-related complications. Bone Marrow Transplant 45, 53–61 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2009.109

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2009.109

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links