Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Anesthesiology ; 93(3): 728-34, 2000 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10969306

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Central neuraxial anesthesia has been reported to decrease the dose of both intravenous and inhalational anesthetics needed to reach a defined level of sedation. The mechanism behind this phenomenon is speculated to be decreased afferent stimulation of the reticular activating system. The authors performed a two-part study (nonrandomized pilot study and a subsequent randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study) using the Bispectral Index (BIS) monitor to quantify the degree of sedation in unmedicated volunteers undergoing spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Twelve volunteers underwent BIS monitoring and observer sedation scoring (Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale [OAA/S]) before and after spinal anesthesia with 50 mg hyperbaric lidocaine, 5%. Subsequently, 16 volunteers blinded to the study were randomized to receive spinal anesthesia with 50 mg hyperbaric lidocaine, 5% (n = 10) or placebo (n = 6) and underwent BIS and OAA/S monitoring. RESULTS: In part I, significant changes in BIS scores of the volunteers occurred progressively (P = 0.003). The greatest variations from baseline BIS measurement occurred at 30 and 70 min. In part II, there were significant decreases in OAA/S and self-sedation scores for patients receiving spinal anesthesia versuscontrol patients (P = 0.04 and 0. 01, respectively). The greatest decrease in OAA/S scores occurred at 60 min. BIS scores were similar between groups (P = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anesthesia is accompanied by significant sedation progressively when compared with controls as measured by OAA/S and self-sedation scores. This effect was not related to block height. The late sedation observed by OAA/S at 60 min may indicate a second mechanism of sedation, such as delayed rostral spread of local anesthetics. BIS was not a sensitive measure of the sedation associated with spinal anesthesia in the randomized, blinded portion of this study.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Spinal , Consciousness , Adult , Double-Blind Method , Electroencephalography , Female , Humans , Lidocaine/pharmacology , Male , Middle Aged
2.
Anesth Analg ; 90(3): 658-65, 2000 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10702453

ABSTRACT

UNLABELLED: The etiology of transient neurologic symptoms (TNS) after 5% lidocaine spinal anesthesia remains undetermined. Previous case reports have shown that patients acutely experiencing TNS have no abnormalities on neurologic examination or magnetic resonance imaging. The aim of our study was to determine whether volunteers with TNS would exhibit abnormalities in spinal nerve electrophysiology. Twelve volunteers with no history of back pain or neurologic disease underwent baseline electromyography (EMG), nerve conduction studies, and somatosensory-evoked potential (SSEP) testing. Then, the volunteers were administered 50 mg of 5% hyperbaric lidocaine spinal anesthesia and were placed in a low lithotomy position (legs on four pillows). The next day, all volunteers underwent follow-up EMG, nerve conduction, and SSEP testing and were questioned and examined for the presence of complications including TNS (defined as pain or dysthesia in one or both buttocks or legs occurring within 24 h of spinal anesthesia). Volunteers who had TNS underwent additional EMG testing 4-6 wk later. Five of the 12 volunteers reported TNS. No volunteer had an abnormal EMG, nerve conduction study, or SSEP at 24 h follow up, nor were there any changes in EMG studies at delayed testing in the five volunteers experiencing TNS. On statistical analysis, the right peroneal and the right tibial nerve differed significantly for all volunteers from pre- to postspinal testing. When comparing pre- and postspinal testing of the TNS and non-TNS volunteers, statistically significant changes occurred in the nerve conduction tests of the right peroneal and left tibial nerve. There was no difference in measurements of F response, H reflex latency, amplitude, or velocity for either leg. Multivariate analysis of variance showed no significant difference between TNS and non-TNS volunteers for the changes in the nine nerve conduction tests when considered together (P = 0.4). We conclude that acute TNS after lidocaine spinal anesthesia did not result in consistent abnormalities detectable by EMG, nerve conduction studies, or SSEP in five volunteers. IMPLICATIONS: Electrophysiologic testing in volunteers experiencing transient neurologic symptoms is not abnormal.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Spinal/adverse effects , Anesthetics, Local/adverse effects , Lidocaine/adverse effects , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/chemically induced , Spinal Nerves/drug effects , Adult , Electromyography , Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neural Conduction/drug effects , Spinal Nerves/physiology , Subarachnoid Space
3.
Anesthesiology ; 90(3): 710-7, 1999 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10078671

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal adjuncts often are used to enhance small-dose spinal bupivacaine for ambulatory anesthesia. Neostigmine is a novel spinal analgesic that could be a useful adjunct, but no data exist to assess the effects of neostigmine on small-dose bupivacaine spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Eighteen volunteers received two bupivacaine spinal anesthetics (7.5 mg) in a randomized, double-blinded, crossover design. Dextrose, 5% (1 ml), was added to one spinal infusion and 6.25, 12.5, or 50 microg neostigmine in dextrose, 5%, was added to the other spinal. Sensory block was assessed with pinprick; by the duration of tolerance to electric stimulation equivalent to surgical incision at the pubis, knee, and ankle; and by the duration of tolerance to thigh tourniquet. Motor block at the quadriceps was assessed with surface electromyography. Side effects (nausea, vomiting, pruritus, and sedation) were noted. Hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were recorded every 5 min. Dose-response relations were assessed with analysis of variance, paired t tests, or Spearman rank correlation. RESULTS: The addition of 50 microg neostigmine significantly increased the duration of sensory and motor block and the time until discharge criteria were achieved. The addition of neostigmine produced dose-dependent nausea (33-67%) and vomiting (17-50%). Neostigmine at these doses had no effect on hemodynamic or respiratory parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of 50 microg neostigmine prolonged the duration of sensory and motor block. However, high incidences of side effects and delayed recovery from anesthesia with the addition of 6.25 to 50 microg neostigmine may limit the clinical use of these doses for outpatient spinal anesthesia.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Spinal , Anesthetics, Local/administration & dosage , Bupivacaine/administration & dosage , Neostigmine/administration & dosage , Parasympathomimetics/administration & dosage , Adult , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Drug Synergism , Female , Glucose/administration & dosage , Humans , Male
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...