Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Anesthesia, Epidural”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2002

Frequency of hypotension and bradycardia during general anesthesia, epidural anesthesia, or integrated epidural-general anesthesia for total hip replacement.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the frequency of hypotension and bradycardia during integrated epidural-general anesthesia as compared with general anesthesia or epidural anesthesia alone. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, open, multicenter study. SETTING: Inpatient anesthesia at 7 University or Hospital Departments of anesthesia. PATIENTS: 210 ASA physical status I, II, and III patients undergoing elective total hip replacement. INTERVENTIONS: Using a balanced randomization method, each hospital enrolled 30 consecutive patients who received integrated epidural-general anesthesia, epidural anesthesia, or general anesthesia. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Occurrence of clinically relevant hypotension (systolic arterial blood pressure (BP) decrease >30% from baseline), or bradycardia (heart rate (HR) <45 bpm) requiring pharmacologic treatment were recorded, as well as routine cardiovascular parameters. Clinically relevant hypotension during induction of nerve block was reported in 13 patients receiving epidural block (18%) and 16 patients receiving epidural-general anesthesia (22%) (p = 0.67). Subsequently, 22 of the remaining 54 patients in the epidural-general anesthesia group (41%) developed hypotension after the induction of general anesthesia, as compared with 16 patients of the general anesthesia group (23%) (p = 0.049). No differences in HR or in frequency of bradycardia were observed in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: The induction of general anesthesia in patients with an epidural block up to T10 increased the odds of developing clinically relevant hypotension as compared with those patients who received no epidural block, and was associated with a twofold increase of the odds of hypotension as compared with the use of epidural anesthesia alone.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Comparison of combined spinal epidural anesthesia and epidural anesthesia for cesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Epidural anesthesia (EA) is popular for cesarean section, but has some drawbacks such as incomplete block, inadequate muscle relaxation and delayed onset. Combined spinal epidural anesthesia (CSEA) has gained increasing interest as it combines the reliability of a spinal block and the flexibility of an epidural block. We investigated the efficacy of CSEA that combines the main spinal and the supporting epidural anesthesia, comparing with pH-adjusted EA, for cesarean section. METHODS: Sixty-four pregnant women at full term were divided into two groups. Patients in the CSEA group (n=32) were given 1.5-1.6 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine intrathecally, followed by 10 ml of 0.25% plain bupivacaine through the epidural catheter 10 min later. Patients in the EA group (n=32) received 20-25 ml of 2% lidocaine which was already mixed with 0.1 ml of 0.1% epinephrine, 100 g of fentanyl and 1.5 ml of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate. The quality and side effects of surgical anesthesia, neonatal state, and postoperative course were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: In the EA group, 22% (7 cases) complained of intraoperative pain but none in the CSEA group (P=0.011). Muscle relaxation and motor block were much better in the CSEA group (P<0.001 and P=0.011 each). Significantly more women in the EA group had shivering (P=0.001). They also had more nausea and vomiting but the differences were not significant. Not only the time to T4 block (9.7 vs. 18.3 min, mean, P<0.001) but also the stay in the postanesthesia care unit, recovery of sensory and motor block and start of postoperative pain were all significantly shorter in the CSEA group. No one in either group had postdural puncture headache (PDPH). CONCLUSION: We can conclude that, when combining the main spinal and the supporting epidural anesthesia, CSEA has greater efficacy and fewer side effects than the pH-adjusted EA in cesarean sections.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

[A comparison of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia with epidural anesthesia for postoperative pain relief after transurethral resection of the prostate].

BACKGROUND: We compared combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (S group) and epidural anesthesia (E group) in terms of pain control after transurethral resection of the prostate (TUR-P). METHODS: All 32 patients received 0.2% ropivacaine at a rate of 2 ml x hr(-1) by a portable disposable pump postoperatively. RESULTS: S group was superior to E group in urethral pain control within three hours after operation. E group was superior to S group in decrease of back pain over six hours after operation. Fifteen patients (47%) suffered from irritability or low back pain and needed rescue analgesics. CONCLUSIONS: Our result indicates that 0.2% ropivacaine at a rate of 2 ml x hr(-1) is not satisfactory to relieve the postoperative pain. Long acting local anesthetics for spinal anesthesia are not suitable for TUR-P. Supplemental administration of opioid to epidural space or higher rate of continuous epidural infusor after operation might be better analgesic choice for TUR-P.

Aged↗
PubMed1981

Obesity, gravity, and spread of epidural anesthesia.

Epidural anesthesia was administered for cesarean section in 250 patients using 20 ml of 0.75% bupivacaine administered at L3-4 with the patient in a sitting position for 5 minutes. Comparing the results with those obtained in a previous study in which parturients were kept horizontal at all times, it was found that the sitting position limited cephalad spread of anesthesia only in obese patients and that the decrease in spread was in proportion to the degree of obesity. The previous findings that cephalad spread is positively correlated to body mass index BMI (weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) and with body weight were confirmed.

Anesthesia, Epidural↗
PubMed1975

The effect of anesthesia on intraoperative and postoperative bleeding during abdominal prostatectomies: a comparison of neurolept anesthesia, halothane anesthesia and epidural anesthesia.

Intraoperative blood loss was measured during abdominal prostatectomies in 213 patients anesthetized with neurolept anesthesia, halothane anesthesia and epidural anesthesia. In 55 of these patients, postoperative bleeding was also measured. The average intraoperative blood loss with neurolept anesthesia was 8.2 +/- 5 ml/min, with halothane anesthesia 6.6 +/- 6.3 ml/min and with epidural anesthesia 3.8 +/- 2.3 ml/min. The difference of blood loss in the epidural group and in the groups receiving general anesthesia is highly significant. Average systolic and diastolic blood pressures were lower during operation in the epidural group than in the other two groups. Statistical analyses failed, however, to show a significant correlation between blood pressures and blood loss in the individual patient. Thus, the ultimate explanation for the diminished bleeding associated with epidural anesthesia is not definitely ascertained. The average postoperative bleeding was not significantly different among the three anesthetic groups.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

A randomized trial comparing low-dose combined spinal-epidural anesthesia and conventional epidural anesthesia for cesarean section in severe preeclampsia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A prospective, randomized study was designed to compare the maternal and neonatal effects of conventional epidural anesthesia and combined spinal epidural anesthesia (CSE) for Cesarean section in severe preeclamptic patients. Additionally, two strategies in the prophylactic management of hypotension in severe preeclamptic patients were evaluated: fluid preloading or prophylactic ephedrine. METHODS: Thirty nonlaboring women with severe preeclampsia (PET), scheduled for an elective Cesarean section, were randomised into three groups: epidural anesthesia with prophylactic fluid loading (EA-F), combined spinal epidural anesthesia with prophylactic fluid loading (CSE-F), or combined spinal epidural anesthesia with prophylactic ephedrine (CSE-V). Hemodynamic data were recorded prior and after induction of regional anesthesia at five-minute intervals. The total amount of intravenous administered fluid and the total dose of vasopressors were recorded. RESULTS: Hemodynamic data were similar between the three groups. The incidence and duration of hypotension was similar in all three groups. Significantly more ephedrine was used in the CSE-V group as compared to the CSE-F group. More lactated Ringer's solution was used in the CSE-F group as compared to the CSE-V group. There were no hypertensive episodes and none of the patients developed pulmonary edema. The time period from induction until the start of surgery and the duration of surgery were significantly shorter in both CSE-groups. Neonatal outcome was comparable between the three groups. CONCLUSION: Our results confirm that combined spinal and epidural anesthesia (CSE) is a safe alternative to conventional epidural anesthesia in severe preeclamptic women and that the prophylactic use of ephedrine is effective and safe to prevent and treat spinal hypotension after combined spinal and epidural anesthesia for Cesarean section in severe preeclamptic women.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Reversal of lidocaine with epinephrine epidural anesthesia using epidural saline washout.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prolonged motor and sensory block following epidural anesthesia can be associated with extended postoperative care unit stays and patient dissatisfaction. Previous studies have demonstrated a more rapid motor recovery following the administration of epidural crystalloids in patients who had received plain bupivacaine and lidocaine epidural anesthesia. However, epinephrine is commonly added to local anesthetics to improve the quality and prolong the duration of the epidural block. The objective of this study was to determine the relationship of 0.9% NaCl epidural catheter flush volume (i.e., washout) to the recovery of motor and sensory block in patients undergoing 2% lidocaine with epinephrine epidural anesthesia. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study design was utilized. Thirty-three subjects scheduled for elective gynecologic or obstetrical surgical procedures underwent epidural anesthesia using 2% lidocaine with epinephrine (1:200,000). A T4 dermatome level of analgesia, determined by toothpick prick, was maintained intraoperatively. Following surgery, subjects were randomized to 1 of 3 treatment groups. Group 1 (control, n = 11) received no epidural 0.9% NaCl (normal saline [NS]) postoperatively. Group 2 (15 mL NS x 1, n = 10) received an epidural bolus of 15 mL NS. Group 3 (15 mL NS x 2, n = 12) received an epidural bolus of 15 mL NS postoperatively and a second 15-mL NS bolus 15 minutes later. Assessment of motor and sensory block was performed at 15-minute intervals until complete motor and sensory recovery. RESULTS: Times to partial and full motor and sensory recovery were significantly faster in the epidural NS groups than in the control group. Full motor recovery was more rapid in subjects receiving two 15-mL NS epidural NS boluses (30 mL total) compared with those receiving a single 15-mL NS bolus (108 +/- 9 min v 136 +/- 13 min) and significantly faster than control group subjects (153 +/- 14 min). Both NS x 1 and NS x 2 epidural bolus groups experienced significantly reduced times to complete sensory recovery when compared with the control group (NS x 1 = 154 +/- 13 min, NS x 2 = 153 +/- 9 min, control 195 +/- 14 min). CONCLUSIONS: A more rapid recovery of motor and sensory block in patients undergoing 2% lidocaine with epinephrine epidural anesthesia can be achieved with the use of 30 mL NS epidural washout. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2001;26:246-251.

Adjuvants, Anesthesia↗
PubMed2002

[Intraoperative awareness during propofol anesthesia with epidural anesthesia].

This report describes a case of awareness and recall during propofol anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia in a 32-year-old woman scheduled for a resection of left ovarian tumor. After induction, anesthesia was maintained with propofol and epidural anesthesia. About one hour into maintenance, the patient was moving with haemodynamic signs suggesting inadequate analgesia. Immediately after extubation, the patient could recall the abdomen being touched during laparotomy. This case indicates that even if appropriate dose of propofol is administrated, intraoperative awareness may occur especially with inadequate analgesia.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

[The effects of cervical epidural anesthesia on epidural somatosensory evoked potentials and phrenic nerve activities].

We have investigated the effects of cervical epidural anesthesia on-phrenic nerve activity (PNA), and epidural somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) elicited by stimulation of the radial nerve in pentobarbital anesthetized cats. PNA was suppressed significantly to 72% of control value 10 min after injection of 1% lidocaine and recovered to control value within 30 min. Following 2% lidocaine injection, PNA tended to be more suppressed than with 1% lidocaine to 57% and recovered to control value within 30 min. Peak latencies of P1, N1, P2, N2, and P3 before injection of 1% lidocaine were 1.05 (0.24), 1.20 (0.11), 1.51 (0.20), 1.56 (0.34), 2.71 (0.33) (msec (SD)), respectively. Though these latencies did not increase after injection of 1% lidocaine, injection of 2% lidocaine increased them significantly and these elevations continued for 120 min. The amplitude of N2 increased significantly after injection of 1% lidocaine and the amplitude of N2 and N2-P3 increased after injection of 2% lidocaine. These results indicate that 2% lidocaine blocked the sensory nerve and the effects continued much longer than the depression of PNA by cervical epidural anesthesia.

Action Potentials↗
PubMed2002

Thoracic epidural anesthesia and epidural hematoma.

This report involves a 74-year-old-male who developed a thoracic epidural hematoma with paraparesis on the second postoperative day in conjunction with thoracic epidural anesthesia established before surgery for acute abdominal aortic dissection. The finding indicates that laminectomy can be performed successfully as late as three days after diagnosis of the hematoma, with a complete restitution of neurological function. High-dose steroid treatment may have been a contributing factor for the positive outcome.

Aged↗
PubMed1994

Effects of epidural anesthesia on incidence of venous thromboembolism following joint replacement.

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism are serious complications following hip and knee replacement surgery. Both surgical procedures have significantly high postoperative rates of DVT. In total hip replacement, the rate of proximal thrombi tends to be higher. However, total knee replacement produces a high rate of calf thrombi and a higher overall rate of thrombosis. In a search for innovative ways to reduce the risk of thrombosis, three types of anesthesia were examined: general anesthesia, epidural anesthesia, and hypotensive epidural anesthesia in which a controlled hypotension is provided. The hypotension commonly exists with epidural anesthesia also, unless blood pressure is maintained with an agent such as ephedrine. When blood pressure is allowed to drop in a controlled fashion, hypotensive anesthesia is effected.

Anesthesia, Epidural↗
PubMed1995

[Management of neurologic manifestations after obstetrical epidural anesthesia].

Epidural anaesthesia is commonly used in obstetrics (70% of all deliveries in the maternity units of Lille University Hospital). Four cases are reported: headache followed by diplopia and amaurosis, delayed lumbosacral paraesthesia, early paraesthesia of the left lower limb, severe cephalalgia. Etiological analysis allowed to find the causes of these disorders and to exclude any anaesthesia responsibility, moreover permitting adapted treatments. The medicolegal aspect must be emphasized and also the need of an extensive medical investigation to find out the aetiology and propose an appropriate management.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

The effects of spinal anesthesia vs epidural anesthesia on 3 potential postoperative complications: pain, urinary retention, and mobility following inguinal herniorrhaphy.

This study was conducted to determine the effects of spinal (n = 113) vs epidural (n = 31) anesthetic techniques on 3 common postoperative complications: pain, urinary retention, and mobility for patients undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy. The study design was a retrospective chart review. Data were collected on 144 subjects who underwent herniorrhaphy between January 1 and December 31, 1999, had an ASA classification of I to III, and were older than 18 years. The local anesthetics used to provide spinal anesthesia were 5% lidocaine, 0.75% bupivacaine, and 1% tetracaine solutions. The anesthetics used to provide epidural anesthesia were a solution of 2% lidocaine with epinephrine or 3% chloroprocaine with epinephrine. Results revealed that pain was not significantly different between the 2 anesthetic groups (P = .65); however, subjects in the epidural anesthesia group were able to ambulate (P = .008) and void (P = .02) sooner than subjects in the spinal anesthesia group. This study demonstrates that epidural anesthesia results in less urinary retention and earlier mobility than spinal anesthesia in men undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy. Minimizing postoperative complications is essential in order for the nurse anesthetist to provide a satisfactory anesthetic experience. This study's findings suggest that epidural anesthesia optimizes recovery for the patient undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy.

Adult↗