Prolongation of spinal duration by escalating doses of intrathecal epinephrine in lower limb arthroplasty.

Aim: The optimal dose of low-dose intrathecal epinephrine in the absence of intrathecal opioids is unknown. Materials & methods: Prospective, randomized, double blind clinical trial of patients undergoing lower limb arthroplasties. The primary end point was spinal block duration measured via motor and sensory block duration. Results: 30 patients undergoing lower limb arthroplasty were randomized into one of six groups with varying intrathecal epinephrine doses 0-100 mcg. There was a direct linear effect between motor block duration and intrathecal epinephrine dose with higher doses being associated with longer block duration (p = 0.011). Mean motor block duration was 3.74 ± 1.13, 3.36 ± 0.47, 3.39 ± 0.60, 4.06 ± 0.98 and 5.20 ± 1.41 h for the EPI0, EPI25, EPI50, EPI75 and EPI100 groups respectively. Conclusion: This study reveals that low-dose intrathecal epinephrine (75-100 mcg) in the absence of intrathecal opioids can be reliably used to prolong motor block duration in lower limb arthroplasty. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02619409 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

What is this summary about? Here, we summarize the results of the addition of a medicine called epinephrine to a type of anesthesia called spinal anesthesia which involves injection of medication into the fluid surrounding the spinal cord. The study was to determine the optimal amount of epinephrine needed to prolong the effect of spinal anesthesia for patients undergoing replacements of their hips and/or knees. What were the results? The study showed that the addition of low-dose epinephrine to spinal anesthesia prolongs the motor block ­ or inability to move the leg ­ in a linear fashion with higher doses of epinephrine associated with longer motor block. Our results did not show a significant difference in sensory block, or the inability to feel the leg. What do the results mean? The study shows that the addition of low-dose epinephrine to spinal anesthesia can reliably prolong the effect of the anesthesia which may be needed in more complicated hip or knee surgeries.

Advantages of the New Tao Mask for Bag Mask Ventilation: a randomized crossover trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Manual bag mask ventilation is a life saving skill. An investigation was made to compare two different facemasks used in bag mask ventilation, the standard and the novel Tao face mask, and evaluate the ability of novices to achieve adequate tidal volume. METHODS: The study design was a crossover trial, which randomized forty medical students with no previous airway experience to learn bag mask ventilation with the standard mask and the Tao face mask. Primary outcome measures were mean and median tidal volume per mask, and secondary measures were hand area, age, gender, and order of mask usage. RESULTS: Medical students who used the Tao mask first achieved significantly more tidal volume than those who used the standard mask first (p = 0.002). However, when comparing face masks that were used second, the tidal volume did not differ significantly between the two masks (p = 1.000). Greater tidal volume was achieved on the second attempt relative to the first attempt with each mask. There was significantly more tidal volume achieved with greater hand size with the standard mask, whether it was used first or second (p < 0.001 and p = 0.012 respectively). Greater hand size was associated with greater tidal volume in the Tao mask also, but only when used first (p < 0.001). When first attempting bag mask ventilation, inexperienced students achieved greater tidal volume with the Tao Mask. The results also suggest that hand size matters less when using the Tao Mask. CONCLUSION: When first attempting bag mask ventilation inexperienced students achieved greater tidal volume with the Tao Mask. The results also suggest that hand size matters less when using the Tao mask.

A Survey of Current Anesthesia Trends for Electrophysiology Procedures.

BACKGROUND: There has been a dramatic shift in recent years in anesthesia coverage for electrophysiology (EP) procedures. An anesthesiologist and electrophysiologist at our institution jointly developed a survey, which was distributed to the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists and the Heart Rhythm Society. Its goal was to document current practice patterns and examine perceived variability in coverage. METHODS: On approval of the leadership from the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists and the Heart Rhythm Society, an online survey was administered to the membership. The survey included demographic data, anesthetic type, and perceptions of the respondents. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-nine surveys were completed. Thirty-eight percent were completed by electrophysiologists and 63% by anesthesiologists, giving a response rate of 8.24% for anesthesiologists and 13.6% for electrophysiologists. Of these, 57% of respondents worked in an academic setting. Over the past 2 years, 66.5% of respondents reported anesthesia involvement in EP cases increasing. These cases are reportedly covered by all anesthesiologists in a group 55% of the time, cardiac anesthesia 32.5%, and a designated team at the remainder of the institutions. Seventy-six percent of respondents reported having designated EP block time in the schedule. Ninety-two percent of respondents reported that patient satisfaction has increased with the involvement of anesthesia services. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesia coverage for EP procedures has continued to increase with an increase in patient satisfaction. Anesthesiologists have had to adapt and provide designated block time to accommodate this increase and also, in some instances, form teams that go beyond simply cardiac anesthesiologists to care for these patients during their procedures.

Labor Analgesia Onset With Dural Puncture Epidural Versus Traditional Epidural Using a 26-Gauge Whitacre Needle and 0.125% Bupivacaine Bolus: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar epidurals (LEs) provide excellent analgesia. Combined spinal epidural and dural puncture epidural (DPE) are 2 techniques to expedite neuraxial analgesia onset. In DPE, dura is punctured but medication is not administered in the cerebrospinal fluid. Expedited analgesia onset has been demonstrated with DPE, using 0.25% bupivacaine; however, this concentration may impede an unassisted vaginal birth and is not currently used for induction and maintenance of labor analgesia. The primary goal of this study was to compare the percentage of patients who achieved adequate labor analgesia following DPE or LE with an epidural bolus of 0.125% bupivacaine. Adequate labor analgesia was defined as Visual Analog Scale (VAS) measurement ≤ 10 mm on a 100-mm scale during active contractions, measured 10 minutes after epidural bolus initiation. METHODS: Laboring patients were randomly assigned to receive LE or DPE. Immediately before epidural placement, subjects marked a VAS score during an active contraction and parturients with VAS < 50 mm were excluded. The epidural space was identified by a loss of resistance technique to saline (17G Tuohy needle [Arrow International, Inc, Redding, PA]). In the DPE group, dura was punctured with a 26G Whitacre needle (Arrow International, Inc). In all participants, a 19G epidural catheter (Arrow International, Inc) was inserted. An epidural bolus was then administered over 3 minutes (12 mL, 0.125% bupivacaine, 50 µg fentanyl) followed by infusion (0.1% bupivacaine, 2 µg/mL fentanyl). After initiation of epidural bolus (time zero), VAS measurements were collected at 2-minute intervals for up to 20 minutes. Median time to achieve adequate analgesia by treatment group was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Time to achieving adequate analgesia was evaluated using a Cox regression model. All analyses were conducted in SAS version 9.4. (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) RESULTS:: Data were analyzed from 80 participants (40 per group). Adequate analgesia at 10 minutes did not differ by neuraxial technique (DPE = 55.3% vs LE = 44.7%; P= .256). However, parturients receiving DPE had shorter median times to adequate analgesia (median [95% confidence interval], 8 minutes [6-10] vs 10 minutes [8-14]) and a 67% increase in the relative risk of achieving adequate analgesia compared to LE (relative risk = 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.64; P= .042). CONCLUSIONS: Although the percentage of parturients achieving adequate labor analgesia at 10 minutes after epidural bolus did not differ by technique, DPE was associated with faster time to VAS ≤ 10 mm compared with LE.