Effective and Economical Option of Anesthesia in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery.

Background: There is only limited data in the literature showing the effect of anesthesia methods on the success of retrograd intrarenal surgery. The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate retrograd intrarenal surgery cases performed under spinal and general anesthesia in terms of effectiveness, cost, hospitalization time and complications. Methods: A total of 337 patients who underwent retrograd intrarenal surgery due to kidney stones between 2014 and 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. In our study, the patients were divided into two groups according to the anesthesia method administered: Group 1 consisted of 172 patients who received spinal anesthesia and Group 2 comprised 165 patients administered general anesthesia. Both groups were compared in terms of demographic data, localization and size of stone, radiographic stone density, operation time, complications, need for postoperative analgesia, length of hospitalization, and stone free rate. Results: The cost of general anesthesia was significantly higher compared to that of spinal anesthesia (p < 0.001). The analgesia application administered within the first six postoperative hours was significantly higher in the general anesthesia group (p < 0.001). In other findings, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion: Retrograd intrarenal surgery can be performed with similar safety and effectiveness under both general and spinal anesthesia. However, spinal anesthesia seems to be more advantageous due to the patients' lower need for analgesics in the early postoperative period and the lower cost of the anesthetics used.

Infrared thermographic assessment of spinal anaesthesia-related cutaneous temperature changes during caesarean section.

INTRODUCTION: Assessment of adequacy of spinal anaesthesia, prior to obstetric surgery is extremely important but can be problematic because currently available clinical assessment methods are indirect and subjective. As the sympathectomy associated with spinal anaesthesia is known to cause vasodilation and heat redistribution, we sought to assess whether spinal anaesthesia led to significant and consistent cutaneous temperature changes as measured by infrared thermography. METHODS: Following ethics committee approval, this observational study was conducted in a tertiary level obstetric centre. Participants included women undergoing elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia. Following consent, a Flir T540 infrared camera captured thermographic images over the feet, patella, buttock, iliac crests, xiphisternum and axilla. Temperature was measured prior to spinal needle insertion (T0) and following clinical assessment when the block was deemed adequate. RESULTS: Thirty patients were included. Baseline temperature varied considerable by site. Spinal anaesthesia altered skin temperature in all areas of interest: right and left hallux (mean of differences (MD) +4.0°C and 5.2°C respectively, P <0.0001), right and left plantar (MD +6.1°C and 6.8°C respectively, P <0.0001), patella (MD -0.33°C, P=0.0445), buttock (MD -0.5°C, P=0.009), iliac crest (MD -0.7°C, P=0.0004), xiphisternum (MD -0.95°C, P <0.0001) and axilla (MD -0.71°C, P=0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Following spinal anaesthesia thermographic imaging identified different patterns of skin temperature changes, with pronounced temperature increases measured in the feet and cooling of a lesser amplitude in the thoracic and lumbar dermatomes. Infrared thermography has the potential to provide objective measurement of sympathectomy.

An Updated Analysis of Utilization of Epidural Procedures in Managing Chronic Pain in the Medicare Population from 2000 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: With increasing costs of health care in the United States, attention is focused on expensive conditions. Musculoskeletal disorders with low back and neck pain account for the third highest amount of various disease categories. Minimally invasive interventional techniques for managing spinal pain, including epidural injections, have been considered to be growing rapidly. However, recent analyses of utilization of interventional techniques from 2000 to 2018 has shown a decline of 2.6% and a decline of 21% from 2009 to 2018 for epidural and adhesiolysis procedures. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this analysis of epidural procedures from 2000 to 2018 are to provide an update on utilization of epidural injections in managing chronic pain in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population, with a comparative analysis of 2000 to 2009 and 2009 to 2018. STUDY DESIGN: Utilization patterns and variables of epidural injections in managing chronic spinal pain from 2000 to 2009 and from 2009 to 2018 in the FFS Medicare population in the United States. METHODS: This analysis was performed by utilizing master data from CMS, physician/supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2018. The analysis was performed by the assessment of utilization patterns using guidance from Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). RESULTS: Overall, epidural procedures declined at a rate of 20.7% per 100,000 Medicare enrollees in FFS Medicare in the United States from 2009 to 2018, with an annual decline of 2.5%. However, from 2000 to 2009, there was an increase of 89.2%, with an annual increase of 7.3%. This analysis showed a decline in all categories, with an annual decrease of 4.7% for lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections, 4.7% decline for cervical/thoracic transforaminal epidural injections, 1.1% decline for lumbar/sacral transforaminal epidural injections, and finally 0.4% decline for cervical/thoracic interlaminar epidural injections. Overall declines from 2009 to 2018 were highest for cervical and thoracic transforaminal injections with 35.1%, followed by lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections of 34.9%, followed by 9.4% for lumbar/sacral transforaminal epidurals, and 3.5% for cervical and thoracic interlaminar epidurals. LIMITATIONS: This analysis was limited by noninclusion of Medicare Advantage plans, which constitutes almost 30% of the Medicare population. In addition, utilization data for individual states continues to be sparse and may not be accurate or representative of the population. CONCLUSIONS: The declining utilization of epidural injections in all categories with an annual of 2.5% and overall decrease of 20.7% from 2009 to 2018 compared with annual increases of 7.3% and overall increase of 89.2% from 2000 to 2009 shows a slow decline of utilization of all epidural injections. KEY WORDS: Chronic spinal pain, interlaminar epidural injections, caudal epidural injections, transforaminal epidural injections, utilization patterns.

Update of Utilization Patterns of Facet Joint Interventions in Managing Spinal Pain from 2000 to 2018 in the US Fee-for-Service Medicare Population.

BACKGROUND: Interventional techniques for managing spinal pain, from conservative modalities to surgical interventions, are thought to have been growing rapidly. Interventional techniques take center stage in managing chronic spinal pain. Specifically, facet joint interventions experienced explosive growth rates from 2000 to 2009, with a reversal of these growth patterns and in some settings, a trend of decline after 2009. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this assessment of utilization patterns include providing an update of facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population of the United States from 2000 to 2018. STUDY DESIGN: The study was designed to assess utilization patterns and variables of facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain from 2000 to 2018 in the FFS Medicare population in the United States. METHODS: Data for the analysis were obtained from the master database from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) physician/supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2018. RESULTS: Facet joint interventions increased 1.9% annually and 18.8% total from 2009 to 2018 per 100,000 FFS Medicare population compared with an annual increase of 17% and overall increase of 309.9% from 2000 to 2009. Lumbosacral facet joint nerve block sessions or visits decreased at an annual rate of 0.2% from 2009 to 2018, with an increase of 15.2% from 2000 to 2009. In contrast, lumbosacral facet joint neurolysis sessions increased at an annual rate of 7.4% from 2009 to 2018, and the utilization rate also increased at an annual rate of 23.0% from 2000 to 2009. The proportion of lumbar facet joint blocks sessions to lumbosacral facet joint neurolysis sessions changed from 6.7 in 2000 to 1.9 in 2018. Cervical and thoracic facet joint injections increased at an annual rate of 0.5% compared with cervicothoracic facet neurolysis sessions of 8.7% from 2009 to 2018. Cervical facet joint injections increased to 4.9% from 2009 to 2018 compared with neurolysis procedures of 112%. The proportion of cervical facet joint injection sessions to neurolysis sessions changed from 8.9 in 2000 to 2.4 in 2018. LIMITATIONS: This analysis is limited by inclusion of only the FFS Medicare population, without adding utilization patterns of Medicare Advantage plans, which constitutes almost 30% of the Medicare population. The utilization data for individual states also continues to be sparse and may not be accurate. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization patterns of facet joint interventions increased 1.9% per 100,000 Medicare population from 2009 to 2018. This results from an annual decline of - 0.2% lumbar facet joint injection sessions but with an increase of facet joint radiofrequency sessions of 7.4%. KEY WORDS: Interventional techniques, facet joint interventions, facet joint nerve blocks, facet joint neurolysis.

Comparison of general anesthesia and combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for retrograde intrarenal surgery.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the applicability of the combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSEA) method in RIRS for the treatment of kidney stone disease and also to compare with general anesthesia (GA) in terms of their effects on early postoperative pain levels and their cost. METHODS: A hundred consecutive patients who were scheduled for RIRS were enrolled in this study and were prospectively evaluated according to the anesthesia methods. Patients were divided into 2 groups randomly: the GA (N.=50) and CSEA (N.=50) groups. Five patients were excluded due to patient incompatibility or inadequate anesthesia. The pain levels of patients in the Group 2 were recorded during the operation using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at minutes 1, 5, 10, 15, 30 and 60. Peak pain levels within the first 24 hours following the operation were recorded for both groups. RESULTS: Ninety five patients in the two groups were determined to be similar in terms of demographic characteristics. The mean VAS score at the postoperative 1st day was found as 1.20±0.9 for Group 1 and 0.82±1.3 for Group 2. No statistically significant differences were identified between the VAS-nram and VAS-ram groups (P=0.450). The total cost of anesthesia medications was similar between the both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, which produces favorable outcomes in the intraoperative and postoperative periods, will become an alternative to general anesthesia. Also, the costs associated with these two anesthesia methods were calculated, it was found that the total cost of anesthesia medications and materials per operation was similar both methods.

Effects of Anesthesia Protocol on Perioperative Outcomes and Costs of Lumbar Microdiscectomies.

AIM: To compare the effects of spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) in lumbar microdiscectomy in terms of their costeffectiveness, and perioperative outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We randomly allocated 100 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo elective lumbar microdiscectomy, into either SA or GA groups. We recorded and evaluated various parameters, including demographic aspects, body mass index (BMI), perioperative hemodynamics, time elapsed from operating room (OR) entry until incision, operative time, time elapsed from application of the surgical dressing to exiting OR, blood loss, post anesthetic care unit (PACU) time, preoperative and postoperative pain scores, postoperative analgesic requirements, first mobilization time, first oral intake, the length of hospital stay, time to return to work, and perioperative anesthetic costs. The patients, anesthesiologists, and neurosurgeons were handed a questionnaire before discharge to determine their satisfaction with the procedure. RESULTS: Several variables were found to be better in the SA group: the mean arterial pressure and heart rate changes were significantly lower, and the time elapsed from OR entry until incision, operative time, time elapsed from application of the surgical dressing to exiting OR, PACU time, the length of hospital stay, and time to return to work were shorter; furthermore, the postoperative pain scores, the analgesic requirements, the intraoperative blood loss, and the cost of anesthesia were all lower. Moreover the first mobilization and oral intake occurred earlier; and most significantly, the satisfaction of the patients and surgeons was higher in the SA group. Furthermore, we encountered no complications. CONCLUSION: Based on our results, we conclude that SA is reliable and clinically successful procedure in lumbar microdiscectomy.

The Utility of Echocardiography for the Prediction of Spinal-Induced Hypotension in Elderly Patients: Inferior Vena Cava Assessment Is a Key Player.

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively assess the diagnostic performance of echocardiographic measurements before spinal anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing lower limb surgery. Emphasis was placed on the dIVCmax-to-IVCCI ratio and IVCCI, where dIVCmax was the maximum diameter of inferior vena cava (IVC) at expiration and IVCCI was the collapsibility index of IVC. DESIGN: Open cohort, prospective, single-center study. SETTING: University hospital. INTERVENTIONS: A transthoracic echocardiography examination was performed in 70 patients before spinal anesthesia under standard criteria and protocol. Patients with intraoperative mean arterial pressure ≤65 mmHg or ≥25% reduction of its preoperative baseline were considered hypotensive. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Preoperative echocardiographic measurements, including IVCCI, dIVCmax-to-IVCCI, ejection fraction, global longitudinal peak systolic strain, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, ratio of peak velocity flow in early diastole and average of peak velocities in early diastole of lateral and septal mitral annulus, stroke volume index, and left ventricle mass index were assessed. Twenty-eight of 70 patients manifested spinal-induced hypotension. Preoperative dIVCmax-to-IVCCI showed the greatest diagnostic performance among the indices. dIVCmax-to-IVCCI <43 had significantly higher diagnostic power than did IVCCI >0.3 (p = 0.032). Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that the best predictors for spinal-induced hypotension were the dIVCmax-to-IVCCI ratio and age. CONCLUSIONS: The preoperative dIVCmax-to-IVCCI ratio can predict spinal-induced hypotension greater than IVCCI and other echocardiographic measurements in elderly patients. Both dIVCmax-to-IVCCI ratio and patient age can act as predictors of spinal-induced hypotension in elderly patients.

An Evaluation of the Safety and Effectiveness of Total Hip Arthroplasty as an Outpatient Procedure: A Matched-Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Outpatient hip arthroplasty is being performed more routinely; however, safety remains a concern. The purpose of this study was to compare the rate of adverse events of outpatient total hip arthroplasty (THA) and assess barriers to discharge. METHODS: We examined 136 patients who underwent unilateral THA by one surgeon and were discharged on the same day of surgery. Using propensity matching, 136 inpatients who received the same procedure, and were discharged on postoperative day one or later, were identified. For each cohort, 90-day occurrence of adverse events, readmissions, and emergency visits were recorded and compared. Adverse events were graded using the OrthoSAVES tool. A secondary objective was to assess potential barriers to same-day discharge. RESULTS: Within 90 days postoperatively, 12 outpatients (8.82%) and 14 inpatients (10.29%) developed an adverse event. There were no significant differences between the rate or severity of adverse events between the 2 groups and no serious adverse events in either group. In the outpatient group, there was a correlation between the dosage of spinal anesthetic (bupivacaine) given and time required to stay in postanesthetic care unit postoperatively. CONCLUSION: When comparing the 2 groups, there were no differences in adverse events at 90 days. At our center, in the appropriate patient population, outpatient THA is a safe and cost-effective option. A potential barrier to mobility postoperatively and successful same-day discharge is the time required to stay in postanesthetic care unit postoperatively, which was significantly correlated with an increased dose of spinal anesthetic given in our outpatient cohort.

Comparison of Hemodynamic Changes in Unilateral Spinal Anesthesia Versus Epidural Anesthesia Below the T10 Sensory Level in Unilateral Surgeries: a Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Unilateral spinal anesthesia is used to limit the spread of block. The aim of the present study was to compare hemodynamic changes and complications in unilateral spinal anesthesia and epidural anesthesia below the T10 sensory level in unilateral surgeries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this double-blind randomized clinical trial in total 120 patients were randomly divided into a unilateral spinal anesthesia group (Group S) and an epidural anesthesia group (Group E). Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rates were measured before and immediately after the administration of spinal or epidural anesthesia and then at 5-, 10-, 15-, 20-, 25-, and 30-min intervals. The rates of prescribed ephedrine and intraoperative respiratory arrest were recorded, in addition to postoperative nausea and vomiting, puncture headaches, and back pain during the first 24 h after the surgery. RESULTS: SBP, DBP, and MAP values initially showed a statistically significant downward trend in both groups (p = 0.001). The prevalence of hypotension in Group S was lower than in Group E, and the observed difference was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). The mean heart rate change in Group E was greater than in Group S, although the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.68). The incidence of prescribed ephedrine in response to a critical hemodynamic situation was 5.1% (n = 3) and 75% (n = 42) in Group S and Group E, respectively (p = 0.0001). The incidence of headaches, back pain, and nausea/vomiting was 15.3%, 15.3%, and 10.2% in Group S and 1.8%, 30.4%, and 5.4% in Group E (p = 0.017, 0.07, and 0.49, respectively). CONCLUSION: Hemodynamic stability, reduced administration of ephedrine, a simple, low-cost technique, and adequate sensory and motor block are major advantages of unilateral spinal anesthesia.

Validation of the imperial college surgical assessment device for spinal anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, technical proficiency for spinal anesthesia has been assessed using observational scales such as global rating scales or task specific checklists. However more objective metrics are required in order to improve novice's training programs. The aim of this study is to validate the hand motion analysis of the Imperial College Surgical Assessment Device (ICSAD) in a simulated model of spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Three groups of physicians with different levels of experience were video recorded performing a spinal anesthesia in a simulated lumbar puncture torso. Participants' technical performance was assessed with ICSAD, a Global Rating Scale (GRS) and a specific Checklist. Differences between the 3 groups were determined by Kruskal-Wallis test with post hoc Dunn's correction for multiple comparisons. Spearman correlation coefficient between ICSAD variables and the scores of the observational scales were calculated to establish concurrent validity. RESULTS: Thirty subjects participated in the study: ten novice (first year residents), 10 intermediate (third year residents) and 10 experts (attending anesthesiologists). GRS scores were significantly higher in experts, than intermediates and novices. Regarding total path length, number of movements and procedural time measured with ICSAD, all groups had significant differences between them (p = 0.026, p = 0.045 and p = 0.005 respectively). Spearman correlation coefficient was -0,46 (p = 0.012) between total path length measured with ICSAD and GRS scores. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first validation study of ICSAD as an assessment tool for spinal anesthesia in a simulated model. Using ICSAD can discriminate proficiency between expert and novices and correlates with previously validated GRS. Its use in the assessment of spinal anesthesia proficiency provides complementary data to existing tools. Our results could be used to design future training programs with reliable goals to accomplish.

Spinal-induced hypotension: Incidence, mechanisms, prophylaxis, and management: Summarizing 20 years of research.

Hypotension commonly occurs in parturients undergoing cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. This leads to maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes, including maternal nausea and vomiting and fetal acidosis, and might even lead to cardiovascular collapse if not treated. Arterial dilatation and reduction in systemic vascular resistance are the major contributors to spinal-induced hypotension. Therefore, strategies aimed at expanding the intravascular volume with fluid loading or increasing venous return with lower extremities mechanical compression and lateral tilt have had limited effectiveness in the management of spinal-induced hypotension. Vasopressors are therefore the mainstay for the prophylaxis and treatment of spinal-induced hypotension. Phenylephrine is associated with improved neonatal acid-base status and a lower risk of maternal nausea and vomiting compared with ephedrine and is now considered the vasopressor of choice in obstetric patients. This review discusses the various strategies for managing spinal-induced hypotension with a particular emphasis on the optimal use of vasopressors.

Preprocedural ultrasound assessment does not improve trainee performance of spinal anesthesia for obstetrical patients: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of additional information from preprocedure ultrasound examination to aid anesthesiology trainees performing spinal anesthesia for obstetric patients. DESIGN: Trainee residents were randomly allocated to landmark technique and anatomy demonstration via ultrasound examination or landmark technique only for spinal anesthetic placement. SETTING: Obstetric delivery suite. PATIENTS: Eighty healthy obstetric patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery. INTERVENTION: Ultrasound examination prior to spinal anesthetic placement. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the number of attempts for the spinal anesthetic. Secondary outcomes included placement duration; block height; and the incidence of need for staff intervention, paresthesia, and bloody tap. Subjective ease of placement was rated on a 100-mm visual analog scale. MAIN RESULTS: Baseline demographic data were similar between the patient groups. The median number of attempts with preprocedure ultrasound and landmark was 3 (interquartile range, 2-7). This was not significantly different from the number of attempts with landmark technique only of 3 (1-60) (P=.69). The median duration of spinal placement with ultrasound and landmark was 92 (51-140) seconds vs 75 (53-126) seconds with landmark only (P=.57). There was no statistical difference between the groups in spinal placement duration, need for staff intervention, paresthesia, bloody tap, lumbar interspace, or block height. There was no difference in subjective ease of spinal placement by the resident. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of junior anesthesia trainees performing obstetrical spinal anesthesia with preprocedure ultrasound and landmark technique or landmark technique only, no significant difference was observed in the number of attempts, duration of spinal placement, subjective ease of spinal placement, or any other measured secondary outcome.

Assessment of an updated double-vasopressor automated system using Nexfin for the maintenance of haemodynamic stability to improve peri-operative outcome during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

Hypotension occurs commonly during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section, associated with maternal and fetal adverse effects. We developed a double-vasopressor automated system with a two-step algorithm and continuous non-invasive haemodynamic monitoring using the Nexfin device. The system delivered 25 µg phenylephrine every 30 s when systolic blood pressure was between 90% and 100% of baseline, or 2 mg ephedrine at this blood pressure range and heart rate < 60 beats.min(-1) ; and 50 µg phenylephrine or 4 mg ephedrine when systolic blood pressure was < 90% of baseline with the same heart rate criterion. Fifty-seven women received standardised spinal anaesthesia. Twenty-seven (47.4%) had at least one reading of hypotension defined as systolic blood pressure < 80% baseline. Systolic blood pressure was within 20% of the baseline in a mean (SD) of 79.8 (20.9)% of measurements. Fifty-three (93.0%) women required phenylephrine before delivery while 10 (17.5%) required ephedrine. Six women (10.5%) experienced nausea and three (5.3%) vomited. The system was able to achieve a low incidence of maternal hypotension with good maternal and fetal outcomes.

Retrograde intrarenal surgery with combined spinal-epidural vs general anesthesia: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) involves a minimally invasive stone surgery, lending itself potential to combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSEA), although it is performed preferably under general anesthesia (GA). This prospective randomized study was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of CSEA for patients undergoing RIRS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients who were scheduled for RIRS were randomized to receive CSEA (n=35) or GA (n=35). Operative time, stone clearance rate, visual analog scale (VAS) of pain, complication rate, anesthetic cost, and hospital stay were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients randomized to CSEA (31) or GA (34) completed the study. In the CSEA group, each procedure was completed and there was no anesthetic conversion. Although based on the prospective randomized method, the GA group still had a little larger stone size (p=0.059) and more multiple caliceal stones (p=0.037). Overall, there were no statistically significant differences in operative time (p=0.088), stone fragmentation time (p=0.074), postoperative VAS pain score at 6 and 24 hours (p=0.156, 0.146), incidence of complications (p=0.870), stone-free rate (p=0.804), and hospital stays (p=0.907) between the two groups. The patients in the GA group experienced a higher mean hemoglobin drop (6.5±3.2 vs 8.6±2.7 g/L, p=0.012). In addition, the anesthetic cost was much cheaper in the CSEA group (183.8±31.4 vs 391.9±59.1 dollars, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: RIRS with CSEA can be completed with no anesthetic conversions and with the same efficacy and safety compared with GA. When considering economical aspects, CSEA appears to be a preferable alternative to GA for the patient whose general health status permits it.

Assessment of endothelial glycocalyx disruption in term parturients receiving a fluid bolus before spinal anesthesia: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Fluid bolus administration is a standard treatment for hypotension. However, the effectiveness of the traditional prophylactic bolus in parturients undergoing spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery has been questioned. One potential mechanism for the failure of a prophylactic fluid bolus to prevent hypotension is hypervolemia-induced destruction of the endothelial glycocalyx, a structure that plays a vital role in regulating intravascular fluid shifts. METHODS: Thirty healthy parturients undergoing elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were recruited. Known endothelial glycocalyx biomarkers, heparan sulfate and syndecan-1 along with atrial natriuretic peptide, were measured before and after a 750-mL crystalloid fluid bolus. Cardiac performance parameters, cardiac index and systemic vascular resistance, were monitored during the fluid bolus using thoracic-impedance cardiography. RESULTS: A significant increase in both heparan sulfate 96 ng/mg (P=0.0098) and syndecan-1 2.4 ng/mg (P=0.045) were observed after the fluid bolus. There was a non-significant increase in atrial natriuretic peptide 0.6 pg/mg (P=0.293). Cardiac parameters showed a small but significant change; over an average of 15 min, cardiac index increased by 0.1L/min/m2 (P=0.0005) and systemic vascular resistance decreased by 30.7 dyn.s/cm5 (P=0.0025). CONCLUSIONS: A prophylactic fluid bolus in parturients undergoing spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery disrupts the endothelial glycocalyx, as noted by a statistically significant increase in post-bolus heparan sulfate and syndecan-1 levels. Although studied in the past, atrial natriuretic peptide could not explain this disruption. Our fluid bolus did not have a clinically relevant effect on cardiac performance.

Comparative study between ultrasound determination and clinical assessment of the lumbar interspinous level for spinal anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study is to compare the accuracy of the ultrasound (US) versus clinical assessment for determination of the spinal level, using X-ray as the Gold Standard for control. METHODS: 200 patients were randomized into two equal groups. Patients in the Clinical Group were examined by landmarks to assess the Assumed Clinical Tuffier's Line, and then by fluoroscopy to determine the True Clinical Tuffier's Line. Patients in the Ultrasound Group were examined by the ultrasound to determine the Ultrasound Tuffier's Line. The results of both groups were compared in relation to the plain X-ray, done for each patient, which determined the Radiological Tuffier's Line. RESULTS: In the Clinical Group, the True Clinical Tuffier's line met the Assumed Tuffier's line in only 12% of the patients. In the remaining patients, wrong leveling ranged from one space above in 80% to 2 spaces above in 7% and in 1% of patients the line was at L2. In the Ultrasound Group, wrong leveling occurred in 22% of patients. The Ultrasound misidentification was less than one level in 17% and one level in 5% of patients. Ultrasound examination had a true limitation of 2% of patients. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound examination of the spine is recommended in patients planned for spinal anesthesia, as it is superior to clinical assessment in identification of the interspinous levels. This will decrease the hazard of spinal cord trauma.

Perioperative outcome and cost-effectiveness of spinal versus general anesthesia for lumbar spine surgery.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: General anesthesia (GA) is the most commonly used anesthetic technique for spinal surgery. This study aimed to compare spinal anesthesia (SA) and GA in patients undergoing spinal surgery, in terms of perioperative outcome and cost effectiveness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 80 patients with ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) physical status I-II. The patients were randomized to receive SA (n = 40) or GA (n = 40). Heart rate (HR), mean arterial blood pressure (MABP), blood loss, duration of surgery, duration of anesthesia, surgeon satisfaction, and duration in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) were recorded. Postoperative analgesic requirement, nausea and vomiting (PONV), perioperative hemodynamic variables, and anesthetic costs were determined. RESULTS: HR and MABP were significantly higher in the GA group than in the SA group at the end of surgery and at PACU admission. Duration of anesthesia, surgeon satisfaction, postoperative analgesic requirement, and anesthetic costs were significantly higher in the GA group. Mean blood loss was lower in the SA group than in the GA group, but the difference was not significant. Duration of surgery, duration in the PACU, perioperative hemodynamic variables, and complications were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: SA could be considered a reliable alternative to GA in patients undergoing lumber spine surgery, as it is clinically as effective as GA, but more cost effective.

Spinal anesthesia for knee arthroscopy using isobaric bupivacaine and levobupivacaine: anesthetic and neuroophthalmological assessment.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to compare the sensory, motor, and neuroophthalmological effects of isobaric levobupivacaine and bupivacaine when intrathecally administered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, double-blind, randomized study with 60 ASA grade I-II patients aged 18-65 years awaiting knee arthroscopy under spinal anesthesia. Patients received 12.5 mg of isobaric bupivacaine or levobupivacaine. Several features were recorded. RESULTS: No significant intergroup differences were observed for ASA classification, time to micturate, demographic data, surgery duration, and patient/surgeon satisfaction. Similar hemodynamic parameters and sensory/motor blockade duration were found for both groups. There were no neuroophthalmological effects in either group. Sensory (P = 0.018) and motor blockade onset (P = 0.003) was faster in the bupivacaine group. T6 (T2-T12) and T3 (T2-T12) were the highest sensory block levels for the levobupivacaine and bupivacaine groups, respectively (P = 0.008). It took less time to regain maximum motor blockade in the bupivacaine group (P = 0.014), and the levobupivacaine group required use of analgesia earlier (P = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Isobaric bupivacaine and levobupivacaine are analogous and well-tolerated anesthetics for knee arthroscopy. However, for bupivacaine, sensory and motor blockade onset was faster, and greater sensory blockade with a longer postoperative painless period was achieved.

[Assessment of prophylaxis and treatment of blood loss in patients with pre-eclampsia].

OBJECTIVE: To improve treatment results of women with massive obstetrical blood loss. Subjects and methods: 96 female patients with average and heavy degree preeclampsia worsened massive blood developing were involved into the investigation. The women were divided into two groups: main (n=55) (basic) - it's patients were treated with complex of offered wiays control (n=41) - it's patients were evaluated retrospectively. During the investigation the parameters of hemostasis system and periphery blood values were performed as dynamic evaluations, acidity-basic state and water-electrolyte balance parameters, medical history were monitored. RESULTS: As a result of the investigation it was found out that these offered actions complex application about reducing massive obstetric blood accelerates restoration of clinic, bio-chemical paramnleters during the early post-operating period CONCLUSION: The application of the offered methods has reduced both inltraoperative blood loss in women with preeclamsia and use of blood components and the time spent on the hemostasis system correction for all the women of the base group.

Anatomical landmarks based assessment of intravertebral space level for lumbar puncture is misleading in more than 30%.

BACKGROUND: The anatomical landmark which is used to identify the correct level for lumbar puncture is the line connecting both iliac crests. This crosses the vertebra column at the level of the L4-L5 intervertebral space or L4 vertebra. It can be difficult to determine in a group of orthopaedic patients due to chronic orthopaedic disorders, chronic pain, overweight, or difficulties with positioning for lumbar puncture. The objective of this study was to determine if identification of intervertebral space by a physical exam differs from that of an ultrasound assessment. METHODS: Adult patients scheduled for lower limb surgery under spinal block were enrolled in this study. The intervertebral space suitable for lumbar puncture was determined by physical exam by an anaesthetist in the sitting or lateral position. This was followed by a lumbar ultrasound. Primarily, a transducer was placed in paramedian sagittal view followed by transverse interlaminar view to confirm the identification of the interlaminar spaces. The 'counting-up' approach starting with the L5-1 space was applied. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty two patients (122) were included in this study. Lumbar intervertebral spaces were identified by ultrasound in all cases. There was concordance of intervertebral space identification (between clinical and ultrasound examination) in 78 cases (64%). Mean deviation of inacuracy was one intervertebral space with no statistical difference among cephalad and caudal direction. There were no statistically significant differences fund in terms of demographic data (sex, age, height, weight, or BMI), positioning for lumbar puncture, or intervertebral space chosen for the puncture between the concordant and the nonconcordant identification groups. The only statistically significant difference found was the difference in the years of experience of the anaesthetist performing the clinical assessment and puncture. CONCLUSIONS: The concordance rate between clinical examination and using assessment of intervertebral space identification for lumbar puncture is 64% among patients undergoing lower limb surgery. No special parameters were found which could make an anaesthetist aware that a patient is at greater risk of inadequate intervertebral space level assessment. Spinal ultrasound can reduce the incidence of inappropriate lumbar puncture level in orthopaedic patients.