Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Neurologic complications after placement of cerebrospinal fluid drainage catheters and needles in anesthetized patients: implications for regional anesthesia. Mayo Perioperative Outcomes Group.
Subarachnoid or epidural needle placement in an anesthetized patient is controversial because general anesthesia and muscle relaxation may mask neural trauma. However, placement of a needle or catheter in the subarachnoid space for the purpose of cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) drainage is frequently performed in anesthetized patients undergoing neurosurgery. The records from 530 consecutive transsphenoidal surgeries performed with lumbar CSF drainage were reviewed to determine the types of neurologic complications attributable to spinal drainage and their rates of occurrence. All patients were anesthetized during CSF drain placement. A 19-gauge malleable needle was placed in 473 (89%) patients. Subarachnoid catheters (20- or 16-gauge catheters placed via 18- or 14-gauge epidural needles, respectively) were placed in 17 (3%) patients. In 40 (8%) patients, the type of drain was unspecified. No new neurologic deficits attributable to spinal drain insertion were detected in the immediate postoperative period or within 1 yr of surgery. Thirteen patients developed postdural puncture headache (2.5%, exact 95% confidence interval 1.3%-4.2%); seven required epidural blood patch (1.3%, 0.5%-2.7%). The low incidence (0%, 0.0%-0.7%) of neurologic injury from spinal drain insertion in anesthetized patients from this study is similar to the incidence of neurologic complications historically reported for both CSF drain insertion and spinal anesthesia. ⋯ The performance of regional anesthesia in an anesthetized patient is controversial due to the possibility of unrecognized nerve injury. We report no cases of nerve injury caused by the placement of cerebrospinal fluid drainage needles and catheters in 530 anesthetized patients undergoing neurosurgery.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Comparative StudyPre- versus postinjury effects of intravenous GABAergic anesthetics on formalin-induced Fos immunoreactivity in the rat spinal cord.
We evaluated the suppression of spinal Fos-like immunoreactivity (FLI) by i.v. anesthetics in the rat formalin model. Preformalin injection (1.5% subcutaneously) treatment groups included i.v. saline controls and three i.v. GABAergic anesthetic groups (pentobarbital 20 mg/kg, propofol 10 mg/kg, or alphaxalone 1.5 mg/kg; n = 12 per group). After perfusion 2 h postformalin, spinal cords were dissected, sliced at 30 microm, and processed by immunoperoxidase staining with an antibody against the Fos protein. Quantification and determination of the laminar distribution of Fos-labeled nuclei were performed at the L4-5 spinal level ipsilateral to formalin injection. Drug groups demonstrating FLI suppression were comparatively studied in a 5-min postformalin treatment group. Pentobarbital pretreatment failed to suppress FLI. However, significant reductions (percent decrease) of FLI were observed with propofol (63%) and alphaxalone (30%) compared with saline controls. Pre- versus postformalin comparison studies showed that propofol, but not alphaxalone, suppressed FLI more effectively when given preformalin. Given the observed inconsistencies between this study of Fos expression and our previous behavioral study, it is questionable whether anesthetic modulation of noxious stimulus-induced FLI parallels that of behavioral responses. ⋯ In this study, we examined whether i.v. general anesthetics (propofol, alphaxalone, and pentobarbital) prevent injury-induced spinal cord changes. We measured spinal Fos protein after rats received anesthetics before versus after a formalin injection. Fos inhibition patterns were inconsistent with behavioral studies of these anesthetics, suggesting that Fos inhibition does not always correlate with behavioral analgesia.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThromboelastography-guided transfusion algorithm reduces transfusions in complex cardiac surgery.
Transfusion therapy after cardiac surgery is empirically guided, partly due to a lack of specific point-of-care hemostasis monitors. In a randomized, blinded, prospective trial, we studied cardiac surgical patients at moderate to high risk of transfusion. Patients were randomly assigned to either a thromboelastography (TEG)-guided transfusion algorithm (n = 53) or routine transfusion therapy (n = 52) for intervention after cardiopulmonary bypass. Coagulation tests, TEG variables, mediastinal tube drainage, and transfusions were compared at multiple time points. There were no demographic or hemostatic test result differences between groups, and all patients were given prophylactic antifibrinolytic therapy. Intraoperative transfusion rates did not differ, but there were significantly fewer postoperative and total transfusions in the TEG group. The proportion of patients receiving fresh-frozen plasma (FFP) was 4 of 53 in the TEG group compared with 16 of 52 in the control group (P < 0.002). Patients receiving platelets were 7 of 53 in the TEG group compared with 15 of 52 in the control group (P < 0.05). Patients in the TEG group also received less volume of FFP (36 +/- 142 vs 217 +/- 463 mL; P < 0.04). Mediastinal tube drainage was not statistically different 6, 12, or 24 h postoperatively. Point-of-care coagulation monitoring using TEG resulted in fewer transfusions in the postoperative period. We conclude that the reduction in transfusions may have been due to improved hemostasis in these patients who had earlier and specific identification of the hemostasis abnormality and thus received more appropriate intraoperative transfusion therapy. These data support the use of TEG in an algorithm to guide transfusion therapy in complex cardiac surgery. ⋯ Transfusion of allogeneic blood products is common during complex cardiac surgical procedures. In a prospective, randomized trial, we compared a transfusion algorithm using point-of-care coagulation testing with routine laboratory testing, and found the algorithm to be effective in reducing transfusion requirements.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe effects of needle bevel orientation during epidural catheter insertion in laboring parturients.
Lateral needle bevel orientation during identification of the epidural space has been recommended to reduce the risk of postdural puncture headache (PDPH). Rotation to cephalad or caudad orientation before catheter insertion is assumed necessary for analgesic success. We prospectively compared the effects of catheter insertion through lateral- and cephalad-oriented Tuohy needle bevels in laboring parturients. Anesthesiology residents were randomized to identify the epidural space with bevels oriented cephalad or lateral. Catheters were inserted without needle rotation. Outcomes compared included ease of insertion, analgesic effectiveness, and complications. We evaluated 534 catheter insertions in 500 parturients. Initial catheter insertion produced satisfactory analgesia in 80.2% of the lateral group versus 91.1% of the cephalad group (P < 0.001). Resistance preventing catheter insertion accounted for the difference. There were no differences in i.v. cannulation (5.8% vs 5.1%), dural puncture (3.8% vs 2.0%), PDPH (0.4% vs 0.7%), or asymmetric block (31% vs 27%). There was a slightly higher rate of paresthesias in the lateral group (31% vs 23%; P = 0.048). In 78% of parturients experiencing both paresthesias and asymmetric block, the side of the paresthesia and greater extent of block were the same. Analgesic effectiveness, as measured by using a visual analog scale, was not different between the groups. ⋯ Two methods of epidural catheter insertion were compared in laboring parturients. Catheter insertion with the needle orifice oriented cephalad was associated with the greatest initial success and the fewest complications.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical TrialEpidural steroids for treating "failed back surgery syndrome": is fluoroscopy really necessary?
Epidural steroids are commonly administered in the treatment of "failed back surgery syndrome." Because patient response is dependent on accurate steroid placement, fluoroscopic guidance has been advocated. However, because of ever-increasing medical expenditures, the cost-benefit of routine fluoroscopy should be critically evaluated. Therefore, 50 patients were enrolled into this institutional review board-approved, prospective, controlled, single-blinded study. At a predetermined intervertebral level, the epidural space was identified using an air loss of resistance technique. Thereafter, an epidural catheter was inserted 2 cm through the epidural needle. To determine the accuracy of the clinical placement, contrast medium was administered through the epidural catheter; antero-posterior and lateral lumbar spine radiographs were then obtained. The number of attempts required to successfully locate the epidural space, the reliability of the air loss of resistance technique in indicating successful epidural penetration in failed back surgery syndrome, the ability of the clinician to accurately predict the intervertebral space at which the epidural injection was performed, and the spread of contrast medium within the epidural space were recorded. A total of 48 epidurograms were performed. The number of attempts to successfully enter the epidural space was 2 +/- 1. In 44 cases, the radiological studies confirmed the clinical impression that the epidural space had been successfully identified. In three patients, the epidural catheter was in the paravertebral tissue. One myelogram was recorded. In 25 patients, the epidural catheter did not pass through the predetermined intervertebral space. In 35 cases, the contrast medium did not reach the level of pathology. ⋯ The clinical sign of loss of resistance is a reliable indicator of epidural space penetration in most cases of "failed back surgery syndrome." However, surface anatomy is unreliable and may result in inaccurate steroid placement. Finally, despite accurate placement, the depot-steroid solution will spread to reach the level of pathology in only 26% of cases.