• Sreenivasa Dharmavaram, W Scott Jellish, Russ P Nockels, John Shea, Rashid Mehmood, Alex Ghanayem, Bruce Kleinman, and William Jacobs.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL 60153, USA.
• Spine. 2006 May 20;31(12):1388-93; discussion 1394.

Study DesignProspective randomized study of patients undergoing spine surgery.ObjectiveTo compare changes in hemodynamic and cardiac function after prone positioning using different prone positioners.Summary Of Background DataProne positioning decreases blood pressure and cardiac function. Several studies have evaluated changes in cardiac function after prone positioning, and linked them to reduced venous return and ventricular compliance. This study compares different prone positioners using transesophageal echocardiography, and determines their effect on cardiac function and hemodynamics.MethodsAfter correction of fluid deficits with the patient under stable anesthesia, hemodynamic and cardiac performance was measured using transesophageal echocardiography. After prone positioning, repeat measurements were performed, and comparisons were made between prone and supine positions.ResultsNo intergroup differences in demographics, fluid deficit, baseline hemodynamics, or differences from supine to prone position were noted. Cardiac output decreased with the Wilson (Union City, CA) and Siemens AG (Munich, Germany) frames, while cardiac index and stroke volume decreased with the Andrews (Hollywood, CA), Wilson, and Siemens systems. Cardiac preload decreased using the Andrews frame. The Jackson spine table (Hollywood, CA) and bolsters had the least effect on cardiac performance.ConclusionAdequate fluid replacement reduced hypotension and hemodynamic instability after prone positioning. The Jackson spine table and longitudinal bolsters had minimal effects on cardiac function, and should be considered in patients with limited cardiac reserve.

19 keywords...

hide…