Summary

Background and objective: Combined spinal–epidural (CSE) anaesthesia may be performed using separate needles or by passing the spinal needle through an epidural needle. The latter technique requires that subarachnoid block is performed before the epidural catheter is placed. This paper examines a series of 201 consecutive CSEs performed with a novel separate needle technique, designed to avoid potential and actual problems associated with the CSE technique.

Methods: The CSE technique involved placement of the spinal needle in the subarachnoid space, followed by replacement of the spinal needle stylet. The epidural catheter was then positioned separately before returning to the spinal needle and injecting the subarachnoid drug.

Results: The technique had a high technical success rate. Both needles were successfully placed in 200 (99.5%) cases. Spinal anaesthesia was successful in all cases. The epidural catheter was used in 179 cases and failure of the epidural occurred in 2 (1.1%) cases. Paraesthesia, inability to advance the epidural catheter or blood in the epidural catheter occurred in 31 (15.4%) and necessitated immediate replacement of the epidural catheter in 14 (7%) cases. Postoperatively, typical post-dural puncture headache was reported by one patient (0.5%) and mild backache by four (2%). There were no neurological complications.

Conclusions: This method of CSE anaesthesia can be associated with high success and low complication rates.

Prolonged headache following dural puncture is an uncommon problem that may occur after a spinal tap, often as a complication of epidural anaesthesia. This problem has also been described after long–term epidural or spinal anaesthesia, myelography or spinal surgery. A case of prolonged postdural puncture headache following lumbar nerve root decompression is described in a healthy young man. No other cause could be found either clinically or with the aid of scanning by computerized tomography or magnetic resonance imaging techniques at the spinal level involved. The symptoms were successfully treated with an epidural blood patch performed seven months following the original surgical operation.

In anaesthetized dogs, stellate ganglion blockade led to a moderate disturbance in left ventricular diastolic function. We investigated the effect of a left-sided block, following injection of 10 mL bupivacaine 0.5%, on echocardiographic variables of ventricular function in eight otherwise healthy patients with sympathetically mediated pain syndromes. After the blockade, heart rate (control: 66±3 (mean± SEM), block: 64± 3 min−1) and mean arterial blood pressure (88.5±6.0 vs. 84.0±8.1 mmHg) were unchanged, but afterload decreased (end-systolic meridional wall stress; 69.6±9.9 vs. 59.8±7.1, P<0.05). Stroke volume increased from 71.2±8.1 to 79.6±7.4 mL, P <0.05. Variables of systolic function were unchanged, but relaxation was prolonged (isovolumic relaxation time; 71±5 vs. 81±4 ms, P<0.05). In patients who were ASA I, there was a small impairment in echocardiographic variables during ventricular relaxation after a left stellate ganglion blockade. This small effect did not compromise ventricular function, and the heart responded with a small stroke volume increase to the simultaneous afterload reduction.

We performed a prospective, randomized study comparing the efficacy and safety of remifentanil, propofol or both for conscious sedation during eye surgery under retrobulbar blockade. Forty-five unpremedicated patients were assigned to receive remifentanil (group R) (n=15, mean dosage: 0.05±0.03 μg kg−1 min−1), propofol (group P) (n=15, 1.5±0.5 mg kg−1 h−1) or a combination (group RP) (n=15, R: 0.03±0.01 μg kg−1 min−1; P: 0.7±0.2 mg kg−1 h−1). Haemodynamic responses were comparable among all groups. Minimum values for respiratory rate were lower in R patients (R: 7 vs. P and RP: 10 breaths min−1). Peri-operative blood gas analysis showed differences in maximum carbon dioxide tensions (R: 51.5 vs. P: 48.3 vs. RP: 45.5 mmHg) and decrease in minimum pH values (R: −0.06 vs. P: −0.0 vs. RP: −0.01). All group P patients reported mild to intense pain during retrobulbar block, while 53% of the group R patients were free from pain. In group RP, 60% of patients experienced no pain and the remaining 40% reported mild pain only. Remifentanil, applied as the sole agent, provided superior pain relief and patient comfort when compared with propofol, but produced greater respiratory depression and postoperative nausea. The combination of remifentanil and propofol provided haemodynamic stability, adequate spontaneous respiration and pain relief, with a low risk of untoward side effects.

The present study was undertaken to evaluate the impact of a new procedure for eliciting informed consent by patients undergoing minor surgical procedures, in which the choice between general anaesthesia (GA) and regional anaesthesia (RA) was possible. In this prospective study, two randomly selected groups of patients were compared: study group (SG), 52 patients, received from the nurse before the preoperative interview, a list of seven questions, which they were invited to ask the anaesthetist; while the control group (CG), 73 patients, did not receive any suggested questions. There were two end points: the proportion that chose RA and the number of questions actually addressed to the doctor at the preanaesthetic interview. Psychological aspects were taken into account by collecting the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale before the preanaesthetic interview. Satisfaction with the interview was recorded using a telephone questionnaire 2 weeks after the operation. The results from the two groups were compared by calculating the odds ratio according to Mantel–Haenszel and by logistic analysis. Altogether, 71.2% of the patients chose RA without any difference between the groups. The average number of questions asked by each SG patient was higher than for the CG (1.67 vs. 0.96). The satisfaction level was similar in the two groups. Our list of questions was designed to facilitate patient autonomy. It offered an aid to those requesting more information and assisted communication. The method did not change the proportion who chose a specific kind of anaesthesia, but does seem to improve patient participation in the decision-making process.

The effect of the addition of clonidine 2 μg kg−1 to prilocaine 0.57% for intravenous regional anaesthesia (IVRA) in the arm was investigated in 56 healthy patients using a randomized, double-blind study. The characteristics of the sensory and motor block, quality of analgesia, development of post-operative pain sensations and haemodynamic variables were studied in three groups (IVRA with prilocaine, IVRA with prilocaine and clonidine, IVRA with prilocaine and systemic application of clonidine at tourniquet release). There were no significant differences between the groups concerning the onset and recovery characteristics of sensory and motor blockade, post-operative pain or side effects. In those patients receiving clonidine, mean arterial pressure decreased significantly (24–28%, respectively) after tourniquet release, while heart rate remained unchanged. Clonidine as an adjunct to prilocaine seems to be of limited benefit during and after intravenous regional anaesthesia.