• Di Zhang, Ryohei Nishimura, Shotaro Nagahama, Toshie Iseri, Manabu Mochizuki, Takayuki Nakagawa, and Nobuo Sasaki.
• Laboratory of Veterinary Emergency Medicine, Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Japan. vetzhang101@hotmail.com
• J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2011 Dec 1;73(12):1573-7.

AbstractTo compare the technical difficulty and safety of epidural catheterization between cranial and caudal lumbar region, thirteen dogs were randomly assigned to a cranial lumbar group (group CraL, n=6) or a caudal lumbar group (group CauL, n=6) depending on different epidural sites, and one dog was used as a negative control without catheterization. After general anesthesia, an epidural catheter was advanced 10 cm cranially from the interspace of L1-L2 in group CraL or from lumbosacral space in group CauL. Dogs were euthanized and catheter position and tip location were confirmed by laminectomy. Spinal cord samples were examined by macro- and microscopic observations. Success rate, time taken for epidural space confirmation and catheter insertion were compared, and overall technical difficulty was evaluated subjectively. Epidural catheter was inserted successfully in all dogs. Time needed from needle skin puncture to catheter placement and saline injection was 226 ± 63 and 229 ± 26 sec in groups CraL and CauL without significant differences. Three dogs in group CraL suffered subcutaneous blood, but no spinal cord injuries were found. Subjective evaluation score of the overall technical difficulty was slightly but significantly higher in group CraL than in group CauL (P=0.009). Epidural catheterization in cranial lumbar region could be performed as feasible and safe as that at the caudal lumbar vertebral region in medium or large dogs.

12 keywords...

hide…