• V Brun-Buisson, F Bonnet, N Liu, L Delaunay, M Saada, F Porte, and J B Homs.
• Service d'Anesthésie-Réanimation, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, Créteil.
• Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 1991 Jan 1; 10 (6): 539-42.

AbstractThis study is a retrospective analysis of 303 consecutive spinal anaesthesia performed in orthopaedic patients of a University Hospital between January and December 1990. Failure of spinal anaesthesia was defined as the requirement for general anaesthesia to perform surgery. The parameters studied as possible risk factors of failure were patients demographics, local anaesthetic agents and solutions and techniques of spinal anaesthesia (single injection versus continuous spinal anaesthesia). Failures were related to inadequate or incomplete extension of sensory blockade or to difficulties to perform spinal injection. Continuous spinal anaesthesia was performed in 209 patients mostly with 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine, while 94 patients received a single injection of either hyperbaric 0.5% tetracaine with adrenaline or 0.5% bupivacaine or 5% lidocaine. Failures occurred in 6.3% of the cases but were significantly less frequent with continuous spinal anaesthesia (4.8%) than with the conventional technique (9.6%). The incidence of failure was higher with hyperbaric tetracaine (11.1%) confirming its poor reliability. Inadequate extension of the anaesthetic block was the main cause of failure whatever the spinal anaesthetic technique. These results point out the reliability of continuous spinal anaesthesia but problems may occasionally occur due to spinal catheter misplacement.

17 keywords...

hide…