• Baris Ulker, Riza Hakan Erbay, Simay Serin, and Hulya Sungurtekin.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Turkey.
• Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2010 Apr 1;26(4):167-74.

AbstractThe aim of This study was to compare spinal, low-dose spinal, and epidural anesthesia using ropivacaine and fentanyl combinations for transurethral surgical procedures. Sixty patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists scores of I-III were allocated into three groups. After pre- loading with 5 mL/kg normal saline, patients in the spinal anesthesia group (Group S) received 15 mg of hyperbaric ropivacaine plus 25 microg of fentanyl intrathecally; patients in the epidural anesthesia group (Group E) received 112.5 mg of ropivacaine plus 25 microg of fentanyl epidurally via an epidural catheter; and patients in the low-dose spinal anesthesia group (Group L) received 10 mg of hyperbaric ropivacaine plus 25 microg of fentanyl intrathecally. Blood pressure, heart rate, peripheral oxygen saturation, time to onset of thoracic (T)-10 dermatome, two-segment sensorial block regression time, full recovery of sensorial block, maximum motor blockade levels, motor blockade regression time, additional analgesic administration, patient comfort, and complications were recorded. The time to the onset of T10 dermatome level was shortest in Group S and longest in Group E (p < 0.001). The sensorial blockade time and motor blockade regression time were shorted in Group L (p < 0.001). The two-segment sensorial block regression time in Group E exceeded that in the other groups. Additional analgesic administration was not needed in any group. No complications or adverse effects were observed in any patient. We conclude that all three anesthetic techniques may be used safely and are appropriate for transurethral surgical procedures. However, low-dose spinal anesthesia with ropivacaine plus fentanyl may be preferable in transurethral surgery because we reach an adequate sensorial level with less motor blockade.Copyright 2010 Elsevier. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

42 keywords...

hide…