Dose-response effects of spinal neostigmine added to bupivacaine spinal anesthesia in volunteers. (1/609)

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal adjuncts often are used to enhance small-dose spinal bupivacaine for ambulatory anesthesia. Neostigmine is a novel spinal analgesic that could be a useful adjunct, but no data exist to assess the effects of neostigmine on small-dose bupivacaine spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Eighteen volunteers received two bupivacaine spinal anesthetics (7.5 mg) in a randomized, double-blinded, crossover design. Dextrose, 5% (1 ml), was added to one spinal infusion and 6.25, 12.5, or 50 microg neostigmine in dextrose, 5%, was added to the other spinal. Sensory block was assessed with pinprick; by the duration of tolerance to electric stimulation equivalent to surgical incision at the pubis, knee, and ankle; and by the duration of tolerance to thigh tourniquet. Motor block at the quadriceps was assessed with surface electromyography. Side effects (nausea, vomiting, pruritus, and sedation) were noted. Hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were recorded every 5 min. Dose-response relations were assessed with analysis of variance, paired t tests, or Spearman rank correlation. RESULTS: The addition of 50 microg neostigmine significantly increased the duration of sensory and motor block and the time until discharge criteria were achieved. The addition of neostigmine produced dose-dependent nausea (33-67%) and vomiting (17-50%). Neostigmine at these doses had no effect on hemodynamic or respiratory parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of 50 microg neostigmine prolonged the duration of sensory and motor block. However, high incidences of side effects and delayed recovery from anesthesia with the addition of 6.25 to 50 microg neostigmine may limit the clinical use of these doses for outpatient spinal anesthesia.  (+info)

Transdermal nitroglycerine enhances spinal sufentanil postoperative analgesia following orthopedic surgery. (2/609)

BACKGROUND: Sufentanil is a potent but short-acting spinal analgesic used to manage perioperative pain. This study evaluated the influence of transdermal nitroglycerine on the analgesic action of spinal sufentanil in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. METHODS: Fifty-six patients were randomized to one of four groups. Patients were premedicated with 0.05-0.1 mg/kg intravenous midazolam and received 15 mg bupivacaine plus 2 ml of the test drug intrathecally (saline or 10 microg sufentanil). Twenty to 30 min after the spinal puncture, a transdermal patch of either 5 mg nitroglycerin or placebo was applied. The control group received spinal saline and transdermal placebo. The sufentanil group received spinal sufentanil and transdermal placebo. The nitroglycerin group received spinal saline and transdermal nitroglycerine patch. Finally, the sufentanil-nitroglycerin group received spinal sufentanil and transdermal nitroglycerine. Pain and adverse effects were evaluated using a 10-cm visual analog scale. RESULTS: The time to first rescue analgesic medication was longer for the sufentanil-nitroglycerin group (785+/-483 min) compared with the other groups (P<0.005). The time to first rescue analgesics was also longer for the sufentanil group compared with the control group (P<0.05). The sufentanil-nitroglycerin group group required less rescue analgesics in 24 h compared with the other groups (P<0.02) and had lesser 24-h pain visual analog scale scores compared with the control group (P<0.005), although these scores were similar to the sufentanil and nitroglycerin groups (P>0.05). The incidence of perioperative adverse effects was similar among groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Transdermal nitroglycerine alone (5 mg/day), a nitric oxide generator, did not result in postoperative analgesia itself, but it prolonged the analgesic effect of spinal sufentanil (10 microg) and provided 13 h of effective postoperative analgesia after knee surgery.  (+info)

Assessing introduction of spinal anaesthesia for obstetric procedures. (3/609)

To assess the impact of introducing spinal anaesthesia for obstetric operative procedures on use of general anaesthesia and quality of regional anaesthesia in a unit with an established epidural service a retrospective analysis of routinely collected data on method of anaesthesia, efficacy, and complications was carried out. Data were collected from 1988 to 1991 on 1670 obstetric patients requiring an operative procedure. The introduction of spinal anaesthesia in 1989 significantly reduced the proportion of operative procedures performed under general anaesthesia, from 60% (234/390) in 1988 to 30% (124/414) in 1991. The decrease was most pronounced for manual removal of the placenta (88%, 48/55 v 9%, 3/34) and emergency caesarean section (67%, 129/193) v 38%, 87/229). Epidural anaesthesia decreased in use most significantly for elective caesarean section (65%, 77/118 v 3% 3/113; x2=139, p<0.0001). The incidence of severe pain and need for conversion to general anaesthesia was significantly less with spinal anaesthesia (0%, 0/207 v 3%, 5/156; p<0.05). Hypotension was not a problem, and the incidence of headache after spinal anaesthetic decreased over the period studied. Introducing spinal anaesthesia therefore reduced the need for general anaesthesia and improved the quality of regional anaesthesia.  (+info)

Incidence of bradycardia during recovery from spinal anaesthesia: influence of patient position. (4/609)

We administered 0.5% plain bupivacaine 4 ml intrathecally (L2-3 or L3-4) in three groups of 20 patients, according to the position in which they were nursed in the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU): supine horizontal, 30 degrees Trendelenburg or hammock position (trunk and legs 30 degrees elevated). Patients were observed until anaesthesia descended to less than S1. The incidence of severe bradycardia (heart rate < 50 beat min-1) in the PACU was significantly higher in patients in the Trendelenburg position (60%) than in the horizontal (20%, P < 0.01) or hammock (10%, P < 0.005) position. After 90 min, following admission to the PACU, only patients in the hammock position did not have severe bradycardia. In this late phase, the incidence of severe bradycardia in the Trendelenburg group was 35% (P < 0.005) and 10% in patients in the supine horizontal position. In four patients, severe bradycardia first occurred later than 90 min after admission to the PACU. The latest occurrence of severe bradycardia was recorded 320 min after admission to the PACU. We conclude that for recovery from spinal anaesthesia, the Trendelenburg position should not be used and the hammock position is preferred.  (+info)

Hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine: a comparison to bupivacaine in volunteers. (5/609)

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine is a newly introduced local anesthetic that may be a useful alternative to low-dose bupivacaine for outpatient spinal anesthesia. However, its relative potency to bupivacaine and its dose-response characteristics are unknown. This double-blind, randomized, crossover study was designed to determine relative potencies of low-dose hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine and bupivacaine and to assess the suitability of spinal ropivacaine for outpatient anesthesia. METHODS: Eighteen healthy volunteers were randomized into three equal groups to receive one spinal administration with bupivacaine and a second with ropivacaine, of equal-milligram doses (4, 8, or 12 mg) of 0.25% drug with 5% dextrose. The duration of blockade was assessed with (1) pinprick, (2) transcutaneous electrical stimulation, (3) tolerance to high tourniquet, (4) electromyography and isometric force dynamometry, and (5) achievement of discharge criteria. Differences between ropivacaine and bupivacaine were assessed with linear and multiple regression. P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Ropivacaine and bupivacaine provided dose-dependent prolongation of sensory and motor block and time until achievement of discharge criteria (R2 ranges from 0.33-0.99; P values from < 0.001 through 0.01). Spinal anesthesia with ropivacaine was significantly different from bupivacaine and was approximately half as potent for all criteria studied. A high incidence of back pain (28%; P = 0.098) was noted after intrathecal ropivacaine was given. CONCLUSION: Ropivacaine is half as potent and in equipotent doses has a similar profile to bupivacaine with a higher incidence of side effects. Low-dose hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine does not appear to offer an advantage over bupivacaine for use in outpatient anesthesia.  (+info)

Sedation depends on the level of sensory block induced by spinal anaesthesia. (6/609)

We have investigated the relationship between the extent of spinal block and occurrence of sedation. In a first series of 43 patients, the distribution of sedation score (measured on the Ramsey scale) was related to the extent of spinal block (pinprick). In a second series of 33 patients, the relationship between sedation score and spinal block persisted after injection of midazolam 1 mg. This study confirmed that high spinal block was associated with increased sedation.  (+info)

Anaesthetic management of a woman who became paraplegic at 22 weeks' gestation after a spontaneous spinal cord haemorrhage secondary to a presumed arteriovenous malformation. (7/609)

A 19-yr-old woman developed a paraplegia with a T10 sensory level at 22 weeks' gestation. The spinal injury was caused by spontaneous bleed of a presumed arteriovenous malformation in the spinal cord. She presented for Caesarean section at term because of the breech position of her fetus. The successful use of a combined spinal epidural-regional anaesthetic is described and the risks of general and regional anaesthesia are discussed.  (+info)

Spinal versus epidural anesthesia for cesarean section in severely preeclamptic patients: a retrospective survey. (8/609)

BACKGROUND: Selection of spinal anesthesia for severely preeclamptic patients requiring cesarean section is controversial. Significant maternal hypotension is believed to be more likely with spinal compared with epidural anesthesia. The purpose of this study was to assess, in a large retrospective clinical series, the blood pressure effects of spinal and epidural anesthesia in severely preeclamptic patients requiring cesarean section. METHODS: The computerized medical records database was reviewed for all preeclamptic patients having cesarean section between January 1, 1989 and December 31, 1996. All nonlaboring severely preeclamptic patients receiving either spinal or epidural anesthesia for cesarean section were included for analysis. The lowest recorded blood pressures were compared for the 20-min period before induction of regional anesthesia, the period from induction of regional anesthesia to delivery, and the period from delivery to the end of operation. RESULTS: Study groups included 103 women receiving spinal anesthesia and 35 receiving epidural anesthesia. Changes in the lowest mean blood pressure were similar after epidural or spinal anesthesia. Intraoperative ephedrine use was similar for both groups. Intraoperative crystalloid administration was statistically greater for patients receiving spinal versus epidural anesthesia (1780 +/- 838 vs. 1359 +/- 674 ml, respectively). Neonatal Apgar scores and incidence of maternal intensive care unit admission or postoperative pulmonary edema were also similar. CONCLUSION: Although we cannot exclude the possibility that the spinal and epidural anesthesia groups were dissimilar, the magnitudes of maternal blood pressure declines were similar after spinal or epidural anesthesia in this series of severely preeclamptic patients receiving cesarean section. Maternal and fetal outcomes also were similar.  (+info)