Continuous Anesthesia : Spinal Versus Epidural For Lower Limb Surgeries

Eraki, Khaled; Abaza, Kamelia Ahmed; El Malky, Amal Ali; Medhat, Marwa

doi:10.21608/zumj.2020.15532.1579

Continuous Anesthesia : Spinal Versus Epidural For Lower Limb Surgeries

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Anesthesia & surgical icu , faculty of medicine , zagazig university , zagazig , Al sharqia , egypt

² Anesthesia & surgical icu , faculty of medicine , zagazig university , zagazig , al sharqia , egypt

10.21608/zumj.2020.15532.1579

Abstract

Background : The use of continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA) has been slow because the high risk of post dural puncture headache (PDPH). However, recent researches suggest significant reduction in PDPH when intrathecal catheters are used. This study aimed to compare between (CSA) & continuous epidural anesthesia (CEA) in lower limb surgeries.
Patients & Methods : A comparative randomized prospective clinical study to compare onset, effect & side effects between (CSA) & (CEA) in LL surgeries. 46 patients, 21 - 60 years of age who were scheduled for elective LL surgeries, expected to last from 2 - 6 hours, were included in this study & divided into two groups of 23 each. Group S (CSA) & Group E (CEA). All patients were assessed for : hemodynamics , technical implementation period , sensory & motor onset , quality of the block , technical problems , post operative visual analogue scale (VAS) & any complications.
Results : Regarding sensory & motor onset time & technical implementation period all were shorter in group S than group E. There was no significant difference as regard hemodynamics, duration of sensory recession & number of top up doses in both groups. There were no neurological sequelae nor (PDPH) in any patient in both groups.
Conclusion : (CSA) using a 20 G catheter is an easy technique, better onset & quality, ↓ risk of systemic toxicity & no ↑ risk of (PDPH) when compared to (CEA).
Key Words : Continuous , Anesthesia , Spinal , Epidural.

Keywords

Main Subjects