-
Anaesthesia Jul 2018Combined spinal-epidural and single-shot spinal anaesthesia are both used for caesarean section. It has been claimed in individual trials that combined spinal-epidural... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Combined spinal-epidural and single-shot spinal anaesthesia are both used for caesarean section. It has been claimed in individual trials that combined spinal-epidural is associated with higher sensory spread and greater cardiovascular stability. We set out to gather all available evidence. We performed: a systematic literature search to identify randomised controlled trials comparing combined spinal-epidural with spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: conventional meta-analysis; trial-sequential analysis; and assessment of trial quality using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Fifteen trials with high heterogeneity, including 1015 patients, were analysed. There was no significant difference between combined spinal-epidural and spinal anaesthesia for our primary outcomes maximum sensory height and vasopressor use (mg ephedrine equivalents). However, trial-sequential analysis suggested insufficient data and the GRADE scores showed 'very low' quality of evidence for these outcomes. The secondary outcomes hypotension, time for sensory block to recede to the level of T10, and the combined outcome of nausea and vomiting, did not differ significantly between the interventions. The block times were statistically significantly longer for combined spinal-epidural in individual trials, but only one trial showed a clinically meaningful difference (11 min). Based on this analysis, and taking into consideration all comparisons irrespective of whether drugs had been applied via the epidural route, there is not enough evidence to postulate any advantage compared with the spinal technique. Future analyses and studies need to examine the potential advantages of the combined spinal-epidural technique by using the epidural route intra- and/or postoperatively.
Topics: Adult; Anesthesia, Epidural; Anesthesia, Obstetrical; Anesthesia, Spinal; Cesarean Section; Female; Humans; Pregnancy
PubMed: 29330854
DOI: 10.1111/anae.14210 -
Acta Clinica Croatica Jun 2019Regional centro-axial anaesthesia, primarily spinal block, is the preferred method of anaesthesia for elective caesarean section because it entails fewer risks for the...
Regional centro-axial anaesthesia, primarily spinal block, is the preferred method of anaesthesia for elective caesarean section because it entails fewer risks for the mother and the foetus compared to general anaesthesia. The most common side effect associated with spinal block is hypotension due to sympatholysis, occurring in up to 75% of cases. Spinal block-induced sympatholysis leads to vasodilatation and consequently causes maternal hypotension, which may compromise uterine blood flow and foetal circulation, and thus cause foetal hypoxia, bradycardia and acidosis. The selection of the most efficient treatment strategy to achieve haemodynamic stability during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section continues to be one of the main challenges in obstetric anaesthesiology. A number of measures for the prevention and treatment of spinal block-induced hypotension are used in clinical practice, such as preloading and coloading with crystalloid and/or colloid infusion, wrapping of lower limbs with compression stockings or bandages, administering an optimal dose of local anaesthetic and achieving an optimal spinal block level, left tilt positioning, and administering inotropes and vasopressors. Instead of administering vasopressors after a drop in blood pressure has already occurred, the latest algorithms recommend a prophylactic administration of vasopressor infusion. The preferred vasoconstrictor in this case is phenylephrine, which is associated with a lower incidence of foetal acidosis, and maternal nausea and vomiting compared to other vasoconstrictors.
Topics: Adult; Anesthesia, Obstetrical; Anesthesia, Spinal; Blood Pressure; Cesarean Section; Female; Humans; Hypotension; Pregnancy
PubMed: 31741565
DOI: 10.20471/acc.2019.58.s1.13 -
Medicine Apr 2019The optimal anesthetic technique remains debated in patients undergoing total-hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to test the efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The optimal anesthetic technique remains debated in patients undergoing total-hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to test the efficacy of general and spinal anesthesia for patients undergoing THA.
METHODS
In January 2018, we searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Google database. Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the use of general and spinal anesthesia for patients undergoing THA were retrieved. The primary outcome was to compare the total blood loss. The secondary outcomes were the occurrence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT), the occurrence of nausea, and the length of hospital stay. Software Stata 12.0 was used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Five RCTs with 487 THAs were finally included for meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between the general anesthesia and spinal anesthesia in terms of the total blood loss (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -20.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -84.50 to 43.05, P = .524; I = 87.8%) and the occurrence of DVT (risk ratio (RR) = 0.85, 95% CI 0.24-3.01, P = .805; I = 70.5%). Compared with general anesthesia, spinal anesthesia was a significant reduction in the occurrence of nausea (RR = 3.04, 95% CI 1.69-5.50, P = .000; I = 0.0%) and the length of hospital stay (WMD = 1.00, 95% CI 0.59-1.41, P = .000; I = 94.7%).
CONCLUSION
Spinal anesthesia was superior than general anesthesia in terms of the occurrence of nausea and shorten the length of hospital stay. The quality and number of included studies was limited; thus, a greater number of high-quality RCTs is still needed to further identify the effects of spinal anesthesia on reducing the blood loss after THA.
Topics: Anesthesia, General; Anesthesia, Spinal; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Humans; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 31008923
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014925 -
Anaesthesia Aug 2021Post-dural puncture headache is one of the most undesirable complications of spinal anaesthesia. Previous pairwise meta-analyses have either compared groups of needles... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Post-dural puncture headache is one of the most undesirable complications of spinal anaesthesia. Previous pairwise meta-analyses have either compared groups of needles or ranked individual needles based on the pooled incidence of post-dural puncture headache. These analyses have suggested both the gauge and needle tip design as risk-factors, but failed to provide an unbiased comparison of individual needles. This network meta-analysis compared the odds of post-dural puncture headache with needles of varying gauge and tip design. We searched randomised controlled trials in medical databases. The primary outcome measure of the network meta-analysis was the incidence of post-dural puncture headache. Secondary outcomes were procedural failure, backache and non-specific headache. Overall, we compared 11 different needles in 61 randomised controlled trials including a total of 14,961 participants. The probability of post-dural puncture headache and procedural failure was lowest with 26-G atraumatic needles. The 29-G cutting needle was more likely than three atraumatic needles to have the lowest odds of post-dural puncture headache, although with increased risk of procedural failure. The probability rankings were: 26 atraumatic > 27 atraumatic > 29 cutting > 24 atraumatic > 22 atraumatic > 25 atraumatic > 23 cutting > 22 cutting > 25 cutting > 27 cutting = 26 cutting for post-dural puncture headache; and 26 atraumatic > 25 cutting > 22 cutting > 24 atraumatic > 22 atraumatic > 25 atraumatic > 26 cutting > 29 cutting > 27 atraumatic = 27 cutting for procedural success. Meta-regression by type of surgical population (obstetric/non-obstetric) and participant position (sitting/lateral) did not alter these rank orders. This analysis provides an unbiased comparison of individual needles that does not support the use of simple rules when selecting the optimal needle. The 26-G atraumatic needle is most likely to enable successful insertion while avoiding post-dural puncture headache but, where this is not available, our probability rankings can help clinicians select the best of available options.
Topics: Anesthesia, Spinal; Humans; Needles; Post-Dural Puncture Headache
PubMed: 33332606
DOI: 10.1111/anae.15320 -
Anaesthesia Jan 2000The combined spinal-epidural technique has been used increasingly over the last decade. Combined spinal-epidural may achieve rapid onset, profound regional blockade with... (Review)
Review
The combined spinal-epidural technique has been used increasingly over the last decade. Combined spinal-epidural may achieve rapid onset, profound regional blockade with the facility to modify or prolong the block. A variety of techniques and devices have been proposed. The technique cannot be considered simply as an isolated spinal block followed by an isolated epidural block as combining the techniques may alter each block. This review concentrates on technical and procedural aspects of combined spinal-epidural. Needle-through-needle, separate-needle and combined-needle techniques are described and modifications discussed. Failure rates and causes are reviewed. The problems of performing a spinal block before epidural blockade (potential for unrecognised placement of an epidural catheter, inability to detect paraesthesia during epidural placement, difficulty in testing the epidural, delay in positioning the patient) are described and evaluated. Problems of performing spinal block after epidural blockade (risk of catheter or spinal needle damage) are considered. Mechanisms of modification of spinal blockade by subsequent epidural drug administration are discussed. The review considers choice of technique, needle type, patient positioning and paramedian vs. midline approach. Finally, complications associated with combined spinal-epidural are reviewed.
Topics: Anesthesia, Epidural; Anesthesia, Spinal; Anesthetics, Combined; Humans; Needles; Punctures
PubMed: 10594432
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2000.01157.x -
BMC Anesthesiology Apr 2021Subdural anesthesia and spinal subdural hematoma are rare complications of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. We present a patient who developed both after multiple...
BACKGROUND
Subdural anesthesia and spinal subdural hematoma are rare complications of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. We present a patient who developed both after multiple attempts to achieve combined spinal-epidural anesthesia.
CASE PRESENTATION
A 21-year-old parturient, gravida 1, para 1, with twin pregnancy at gestational age 34 weeks underwent cesarean delivery. Routine combined spinal-epidural anesthesia was planned; however, no cerebrospinal fluid outflow was achieved after several attempts. Bupivacaine (2.5 mL) administered via a spinal needle only achieved asymmetric blockade of the lower extremities, reaching T12. Then, epidural administration of low-dose 2-chlorprocaine caused unexpected blockade above T2 as well as tinnitus, dyspnea, and inability to speak. The patient was intubated, and the twins were delivered. Ten minutes after the operation, the patient was awake with normal tidal volume. The endotracheal tube was removed, and she was transferred to the intensive care unit for further observation. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging suggested a spinal subdural hematoma extending from T12 to the cauda equina. Sensory and motor function completely recovered 5 h after surgery. She denied headache, low back pain, or other neurologic deficit. The patient was discharged 6 days after surgery. One month later, repeat MRI was normal.
CONCLUSIONS
All anesthesiologists should be aware of the possibility of SSDH and subdural block when performing neuraxial anesthesia, especially in patients in whom puncture is difficult. Less traumatic methods of achieving anesthesia, such as epidural anesthesia, single-shot spinal anesthesia, or general anesthesia should be considered in these patients. Furthermore, vital signs and neurologic function should be closely monitored during and after surgery.
Topics: Anesthesia, Epidural; Anesthesia, Obstetrical; Anesthesia, Spinal; Cesarean Section; Female; Hematoma, Subdural, Spinal; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Pregnancy; Pregnancy, Twin; Young Adult
PubMed: 33902465
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-021-01352-3 -
Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia 2011Spinal anesthesia is an integral part of the daily routine of countless anesthesiologists. It is considered to be a safe procedure, although some complications related... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Spinal anesthesia is an integral part of the daily routine of countless anesthesiologists. It is considered to be a safe procedure, although some complications related to this technique, among them the most feared is cardiopulmonary arrest (cardiac arrest, CA), do exist. The real incidence of CA related to spinal anesthesia, as well as its etiology, is not known and has motivated this review article.
CONTENTS
Articles published in the last twenty years in Medline indexed journals and in a textbook were reviewed. The objective of the present review was to identify the incidence of spinal block anesthesia-related CA and the etiology of those cases. We also tried to identify possible risk factors. Finally, treatment strategies described in the literature were reviewed in order to determine the best conduct when facing a case of CA during spinal anesthesia.
CONCLUSIONS
The incidence of spinal anesthesia-related CA varies, and it seems to be lower when compared to that of general anesthesia. In the past, it was believed that CA was due to hypoxemia related especially to excessive sedation. However, nowadays, it is known that the etiology of CA during spinal block anesthesia is related to cardiocirculatory factors, mainly a reduction of preload resulting from sympathetic blockade. Other factors that increase the risk of developing CA also exist. Among those factors, the following should be mentioned: changes in patient positioning and hypovolemia. It is very important to institute treatment as soon as possible. Besides a vagolytic agent, early use of a sympathomimetic drug, especially adrenaline, is also recommended to minimize damage to the patient.
Topics: Anesthesia, Spinal; Heart Arrest; Humans; Risk Factors
PubMed: 21334513
DOI: 10.1016/S0034-7094(11)70012-5 -
Minerva Anestesiologica May 2017This narrative review summarizes the evidence derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) pertaining to the use of adjunctive ultrasonography (US) for neuraxial... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
This narrative review summarizes the evidence derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) pertaining to the use of adjunctive ultrasonography (US) for neuraxial blocks.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The literature search was conducted using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and PUBMED databases. For the MEDLINE and EMBASE searches, the MESH terms "ultrasonography" and key word "ultrasound" were queried; using the operator "and", they were combined with the MESH terms "neuraxial block," "epidural anesthesia," "epidural analgesia," "spinal anesthesia," "spinal analgesia," "intrathecal anesthesia," "intrathecal analgesia," "caudal anesthesia," and "caudal analgesia." For the PUBMED search, the search terms "ultrasound neuraxial," "ultrasound intrathecal," "ultrasound epidural" (limited to clinical trials), "ultrasound spinal" (limited to clinical trials), and "ultrasound caudal" (limited to clinical trials) were queried. Seventeen RCTs were retained for analysis.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Compared to conventional palpation of landmarks, US assistance (i.e., preprocedural scanning) results in fewer needle passes/insertions and skin punctures for neuraxial blocks in obstetrical and surgical patients. These benefits seem most pronounced when expert operators carry out the sonographic exams and for patients displaying difficult spinal anatomy. Preliminary findings also suggest that US provides similar pain relief and functional improvement to fluoroscopy for epidural/caudal steroid injection in patients afflicted with chronic spinal pain. Although one trial demonstrated shorter needling time with US guidance (i.e., real-time scanning of needle advancement) compared to US assistance, these findings require further validation.
CONCLUSIONS
Published reports of RCTs provide evidence to formulate limited recommendations regarding the use of adjunctive US for neuraxial blocks. Further well-designed RCTs are warranted.
Topics: Analgesia, Epidural; Anesthesia, Conduction; Anesthesia, Epidural; Anesthesia, Spinal; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 27827521
DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.16.11650-5 -
South African Family Practice :... Jul 2022Obstetric spinal anaesthesia is routinely used in South African district hospitals for caesarean sections, providing better maternal and neonatal outcomes than general...
Obstetric spinal anaesthesia is routinely used in South African district hospitals for caesarean sections, providing better maternal and neonatal outcomes than general anaesthesia in appropriate patients. However, practitioners providing anaesthesia in this context are usually generalists who practise anaesthesia infrequently and may be unfamiliar with dealing with complications of spinal anaesthesia or with conversion from spinal to general anaesthesia. This is compounded by challenges with infrastructure, shortages of equipment and sundries and a lack of context-sensitive guidelines and support from specialised anaesthetic services for district hospitals. This continuous professional development (CPD) article aims to provide guidance with respect to several key areas related to obstetric spinal anaesthesia, and to address common concerns and queries. We stress that good clinical practice is essential to avoid predictable, common complications, and hence a thorough preoperative preparation is essential. We further discuss clinical indications for preoperative blood testing, spinal needle choice, the use of isobaric bupivacaine, spinal hypotension, failed or partial spinal block and pain during the caesarean section. Where possible, relevant local and international guidelines are referenced for further reading and guidance, and a link to a presentation of this topic is provided.
Topics: Anesthesia, Obstetrical; Anesthesia, Spinal; Bupivacaine; Cesarean Section; Female; Hospitals, District; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy
PubMed: 35924622
DOI: 10.4102/safp.v64i1.5529 -
Operative Neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.) Oct 2022Spinal anesthesia is a safe and effective alternative to general anesthesia for patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery, and numerous reports have demonstrated its...
BACKGROUND
Spinal anesthesia is a safe and effective alternative to general anesthesia for patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery, and numerous reports have demonstrated its advantages. To the best of our knowledge, no group has specifically reported on the use of spinal anesthesia in thoracic-level spine surgeries because there is a hypothetical risk of injuring the conus medullaris at these levels. With the advantages of spinal anesthesia and the desire for many elderly patients to avoid general anesthesia, our group has uniquely explored the use of this modality on select patients with thoracic pathology requiring surgical intervention.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the feasibility of performing thoracic-level spinal surgeries under spinal anesthesia and report our experience with 3 patients.
METHODS
A retrospective chart review of medical records was undertaken, involving clinical notes, operative notes, and anesthesia records.
RESULTS
Three spinal stenosis patients underwent thoracic laminectomy under spinal anesthesia. Two surgeries were performed at the T11-T12 level and 1 at the T12-L1 level. The average age was 82 years, average American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 3.3, and 1 identified as female. Two cases used hyperbaric 0.75% bupivacaine dissolved in dextrose, and 1 used isobaric 0.5% bupivacaine dissolved in water.
CONCLUSION
Spinal anesthesia is feasible for thoracic-level spine procedures, even in elderly patients with comorbidities. We describe our cases and technique for safely achieving a thoracic level of analgesia, as well as discuss recommendations, adverse events, and considerations for the use of spinal anesthesia during lower thoracic-level spine operations.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anesthesia, Spinal; Bupivacaine; Female; Glucose; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36106935
DOI: 10.1227/ons.0000000000000325