Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T02:00:00.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of epidural volume extension on spinal block with hyperbaric or plain bupivacaine for Caesarean delivery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2008

S. Kucukguclu ,
H. Unlugenc ,
F. Gunenc ,
B. Kuvaki ,
N. Gokmen ,
S. Gunasti ,
S. Guclu ,
F. Yilmaz  and
G. Isik
S. Kucukguclu
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylül University, School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, İzmir, Turkey
H. Unlugenc
Affiliation:
Cukurova University, School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Adana, Turkey
F. Gunenc
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylül University, School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, İzmir, Turkey
B. Kuvaki
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylül University, School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, İzmir, Turkey
N. Gokmen*
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylül University, School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, İzmir, Turkey
S. Gunasti
Affiliation:
Cukurova University, School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Adana, Turkey
S. Guclu
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylül University, School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, İzmir, Turkey
F. Yilmaz
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylül University, School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, İzmir, Turkey
G. Isik
Affiliation:
Cukurova University, School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Adana, Turkey
*
Correspondence to: Necati Gokmen, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Anesteziyoloji ve Reanimasyon AD, 35340 Inciralti, Izmir, Turkiye. E-mail: [email protected]; Tel: +90 232 4122810; Fax: +90 232 4122810
Get access

Summary

Background and objective

Epidural volume extension via a combined spinal–epidural is the enhancement of a small-dose intrathecal block by an epidural injection of physiological saline solution. We evaluated the effect of epidural volume extension on the combined spinal–epidural technique of providing spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section with hyperbaric or plain 0.5% bupivacaine.

Methods

Patients (n = 240) with height >163 cm received 9 mg and patients <163 cm received 8 mg of bupivacaine. Each study drug was combined with 20 μg fentanyl. Using the combined spinal–epidural technique, Group A (n = 60) received hyperbaric bupivacaine, and Group B (n = 60) received hyperbaric bupivacaine and 10 mL saline epidurally 5 min after subarachnoid injection. Group C (n = 60) received plain bupivacaine and Group D (n = 60) received plain bupivacaine and 10 mL saline epidurally 5 min after subarachnoid injection. An anaesthetist blinded to the anaesthetic solution injected examined the level of analgesia by the pinprick method and motor block with the modified Bromage scale for 30 min after subarachnoid injection, during the intraoperative period and subsequently every 15 min for 135 min during the recovery period.

Results

Time to reach a sensory block at T4 was significantly shorter in Groups C and D than in Groups A (P = 0.003 and 0.017) and B (P = 0.006 and 0.048), respectively. During the intraoperative period, sensory block levels were significantly higher in Group C than in Group A. Recovery was similar in all groups; only onset was faster in Groups C and D.

Conclusion

There was no effect of epidural volume extension on the profile of spinal anaesthesia with the combined spinal–epidural technique for Caesarean section using hyperbaric or plain bupivacaine.

Keywords

ANAESTHESIA SPINALANAESTHESIA EPIDURALBUPIVACAINEEPIDURAL SPACE, volume expansionCAESAREAN SECTION.
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , April 2008 , pp. 307 - 313
Copyright
Copyright © European Society of Anaesthesiology 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Rawal, N, Schollin, J, Wesstrom, G. Epidural vs. combined spinal epidural block for cesarean section. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1988; 32: 61–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Blumgart, CH, Ryall, D, Dennison, B, Thompson-Hill, LM. Mechanism of extension of spinal anaesthesia by extradural injection of local anaesthetic. Br J Anaesth 1992; 69: 457–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Stienstra, R, Dahan, A, Alhadi, BZ, van Kleef, JW, Burm, AG. Mechanism of action of an epidural top-up in combined spinal epidural anaesthesia. Anesth Analg 1996; 83: 382–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Mardirosoff, C, Dumont, L, Lemedioni, P, Pauwels, P, Massaut, J. Sensory block extension during combined spinal and epidural. Regul Anesth Pain Med 1998; 23: 92–95.Google ScholarPubMed
5.Higuchi, H, Adachi, Y, Kazama, T. Effects of epidural saline injection on cerebrospinal fluid volume and velocity waveform: a magnetic resonance imaging study. Anesthesiology 2005; 102: 285–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Yamazaki, Y, Mimura, M, Hazama, K, Namiki, A. Reinforcement of spinal anesthesia by epidural injection of saline: a comparison of hyperbaric and isobaric tetracaine. J Anesth 2000; 14: 73–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Buttner, J, Klose, R. Alkalinization of mepivacaine for axillary plexus anesthesia using a catheter. Reg Anaesthesiol 1991; 14: 17–24.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Camorcia, M, Capogna, G. Sensory assessment of epidural block for Caesarean section: a systematic comparison of pinprick, cold and touch sensation. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2006; 23: 611–617.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Lew, E, Yeo, SW, Thomas, E. Combined spinal–epidural anesthesia using epidural volume extension leads to faster motor recovery after elective cesarean delivery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Anesth Analg 2004; 98: 810–814.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Malinovsky, JM, Renaud, G, Corre, PL et al. Intrathecal bupivacaine in humans: influence of volume and baricity of solutions. Anesthesiology 1999; 91: 1260–1266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Harten, JM, Boyne, I, Hannah, P, Varveris, D, Brown, A. Effects of a height and weight adjusted dose of local anaesthetic for spinal anaesthesia for elective Caesarean section. Anaesthesia 2005; 60: 348–353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Danelli, G, Zangrillo, A, Nucera, D et al. The minimum effective dose of 0.5% hyperbaric spinal bupivacaine for cesarean section. Minerva Anestesiol 2001; 67: 573–577.Google ScholarPubMed
13.Takiguchi, T, Okano, T, Egawa, H, Okubo, Y, Saito, K, Kitajima, T. The effect of epidural saline injection on analgesic level during combined spinal and epidural anesthesia assessed clinically and myelographically. Anesth Analg 1997; 85: 1097–2100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Stienstra, R, Dilrosun-Alhadi, BZ, Dahan, A, van Kleef, JW, Veering, BT, Burm, AG. The epidural ‘top-up’ in combined spinal–epidural anesthesia: the effect of volume vs. dose. Anesth Analg 1999; 88: 810–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Beale, N, Evans, B, Plaat, F, Columb, MO, Lyons, G, Stocks, GM. Effect of epidural volume extension on dose requirement of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine at Caesarean section. Br J Anaesth 2005; 95: 500–503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Logan, MR, McClure, JH, Wildsmith, JA. Plain bupivacaine: an unpredictable spinal anaesthetic agent. Br J Anaesth 1986; 58: 292–296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Russell, IF, Holmqvist, EL. Subarachnoid analgesia for caesarean section. A double-blind comparison of plain and hyperbaric 0.5% bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth 1987; 59: 347–353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Sarvela, PJ, Halonen, PM, Korttila, KT. Comparison of 9 mg of intrathecal plain and hyperbaric bupivacaine both with fentanyl for cesarean delivery. Anesth Analg 1999; 89: 1257–1262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Khaw, KS, Ngan Kee, WD, Wong, M, Ng, F, Lee, A. Spinal ropivacaine for cesarean delivery: a comparison of hyperbaric and plain solutions. Anesth Analg 2002; 94: 680–685.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Vercauteren, MP, Coppejans, HC, Hoffmann, VL, Saldien, V, Adriaensen, HA. Small-dose hyperbaric vs. plain bupivacaine during spinal anesthesia for cesarean section. Anesth Analg 1998; 86: 989–993.Google ScholarPubMed
21.Moller, IW, Fernandes, A, Edstrom, HH. Subarachnoid anaesthesia with 0.5% bupivacaine: effects of density. Br J Anaesth 1984; 56: 1191–1195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Chambers, WA, Edstrom, HH, Scott, DB. Effect of baricity on spinal anaesthesia with bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth 1981; 53: 279–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Rucklidge, MW, Paech, MJ, Yentis, SM. A comparison of the lateral, Oxford and sitting positions for performing combined spinal–epidural anaesthesia for elective Caesarean section. Anaesthesia 2005; 60: 535–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Karaman, S, Akercan, F, Akarsu, T, Firat, V, Ozcan, O, Karadadas, N. Comparison of the maternal and neonatal effects of epidural block and of combined spinal–epidural block for Cesarean section. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005; 121: 18–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.Balki, M, Carvalho, JC. Intraoperative nausea and vomiting during cesarean section under regional anesthesia. Int J Obstet Anesth 2005; 14: 230–241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed