Survey of anesthesia practice in spine surgery patients in the United States.

PURPOSE: There is a wide range of anesthetic practice in spine surgery with respect to anesthetic choice, blood conservation, and monitoring. There is no ideal technique with respect to each of these choices. This study was designed to determine the usual practice for members of the Society of Neurosurgical Anesthesia and Critical Care (SNACC), with regard to the use of anesthetic technique, the type of monitoring used (and the person responsible for its application and interpretation), and the blood conservation strategies most often utilized for the management of patients undergoing spinal surgery. METHODS: A total of 415 questionnaires were mailed to all current members of the SNACC. Of these, 85 (23%) were completed and returned. RESULTS: The majority of the respondents administer general anesthesia for lumbar laminectomy. Somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) monitoring is available at most of the institutions (94%) but only utilized in 75% of patients undergoing a Harrington rod placement. Motor evoked potential monitoring is available at 50% of the institutions, but utilized 25% of the time for these surgeries. The two most frequent blood conservation strategies utilized are intraoperative salvage and autologous donation. CONCLUSION: The most frequent monitoring utilized for major spinal surgeries is SSEP. Autologous donation and intraoperative salvage are the most frequent blood conservation methods utilized.

Diluent volume for epidural fentanyl and its effect on analgesia in early labor.

UNLABELLED: Epidural fentanyl after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose provides adequate analgesia and allows for ambulation during early labor. We designed the current study to determine the influence of the diluent volume of the epidural fentanyl bolus (e.g., whether it has an effect on the onset and duration of analgesia). Sixty laboring primigravid women received a 3-mL epidural test dose of lidocaine with epinephrine and then received a fentanyl 100- micro g bolus in either a 2-mL, 10-mL, or 20-mL volume. Pain scores and side effects were recorded for each patient. The onset of analgesia was similar in all three groups. The mean duration before re-dose was not significantly different in the 2-mL group (108 +/- 40 min), the 10-mL group (126 +/- 57 min), or the 20-mL group (126 +/- 41 min). No patient in any group experienced any detectable motor block; one patient (2-mL group) complained of mild knee weakness and was not allowed to ambulate. In early laboring patients, the volume in which 100 micro g of epidural fentanyl (after a lidocaine-epinephrine test dose) is administered does not affect the onset or duration of analgesia, nor does it affect the ability to ambulate. IMPLICATIONS: In early laboring patients, the volume in which 100 micro g of epidural fentanyl (after a lidocaine-epinephrine test dose) is administered does not affect the onset or duration of ambulatory analgesia.

The addition of hydromorphone to epidural fentanyl does not affect analgesia in early labour.

PURPOSE: Epidural fentanyl after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose, provides adequate analgesia and allows for ambulation during early labour. The current study was designed to determine the influence of hydromorphone added to an epidural fentanyl bolus (e.g., whether there is an increase in duration of analgesia). METHODS: Forty-four labouring primigravid women, at less than 5 cm cervical dilation, who requested epidural analgesia were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind study. After a 3 mL test dose of lidocaine with epinephrine, patients received fentanyl 100 microgram (in 10 mL volume). They randomly received the fentanyl with either saline or hydromorphone (300 microgram). After administration of the initial analgesic, pain scores and side effects were recorded for each patient at ten, 20, and 30 min, and every 30 min thereafter, by an observer blinded to the technique used. RESULTS: The patients were taller in the hydromorphone group (P < 0.04). There were no other demographic differences between the two groups. The mean duration prior to re-dose was not significantly different in the group that received hydromorphone (135 +/- 52 min) compared to the control group (145 +/- 46 min). Side effects were similar between the two groups. No patient in either group experienced any detectable motor block. CONCLUSION: In early labouring patients, the addition of hydromorphone (300 microgram) to epidural fentanyl (100 microgram after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose) neither prolongs the duration of analgesia nor affects the ability to ambulate, and cannot be recommended according to the current study.