Effect of magnesium added to local anesthetics for caudal anesthesia on postoperative pain in pediatric surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Magnesium has been investigated as an adjuvant for neuraxial anesthesia, but the effect of caudal magnesium on postoperative pain is inconsistent. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the analgesic effect of caudal magnesium. METHODS: We searched six databases, including trial registration sites. Randomized clinical trials reporting the effect of caudal magnesium on postoperative pain after general anesthesia were eligible. The risk ratio for use of rescue analgesics after surgery was combined using a random-effects model. We also assessed adverse events. The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. We assessed risk of bias with Cochrane domains. We controlled type I and II errors due to sparse data and repetitive testing with Trial Sequential Analysis. We assessed the quality of evidence with GRADE. RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials (247 patients) evaluated the need for rescue analgesics. In all four trials, 50 mg of magnesium was administered with caudal ropivacaine. The results suggested that the need for rescue analgesia was reduced significantly by caudal magnesium administration (risk ratio 0.45; 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.86). There was considerable heterogeneity as indicated by an I2 value of 62.5%. The Trial Sequential Analysis-adjusted confidence interval was 0.04-5.55, indicating that further trials are required. The quality of evidence was very low. The rate of adverse events was comparable between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Caudal magnesium may reduce the need for rescue analgesia after surgery, but further randomized clinical trials with a low risk of bias and a low risk of random errors are necessary to assess the effect of caudal magnesium on postoperative pain and adverse events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000025344.

Comparison of saddle, lumbar epidural and caudal blocks on anal sphincter tone: A prospective, randomized study.

Objective To compare the effects of saddle, lumbar epidural and caudal blocks on anal sphincter tone using anorectal manometry. Methods Patients undergoing elective anorectal surgery with regional anaesthesia were divided randomly into three groups and received a saddle (SD), lumbar epidural (LE), or caudal (CD) block. Anorectal manometry was performed before and 30 min after each regional block. The degree of motor blockade of the anal sphincter was compared using the maximal resting pressure (MRP) and the maximal squeezing pressure (MSP). Results The study analysis population consisted of 49 patients (SD group, n = 18; LE group, n = 16; CD group, n = 15). No significant differences were observed in the percentage inhibition of the MRP among the three regional anaesthetic groups. However, percentage inhibition of the MSP was significantly greater in the SD group (83.6 ± 13.7%) compared with the LE group (58.4 ± 19.8%) and the CD group (47.8 ± 16.9%). In all groups, MSP was reduced significantly more than MRP after each regional block. Conclusions Saddle block was more effective than lumbar epidural or caudal block for depressing anal sphincter tone. No differences were detected between lumbar epidural and caudal blocks.

Epidural pressure changes following caudal blockade: a prospective, observational study.

PURPOSE: Recent case reports raise the question as to whether anesthetic agents injected into the epidural space could lead to a 'compartment syndrome' and neurovascular sequelae. Single-shot caudal epidural anesthesia has been established as a safe technique, but changes in pressure in the caudal epidural space have not been described. Our aim was to study pressure changes to provide preliminary information for future studies design. METHODS: We prospectively measured the pressure changes in the caudal epidural space in 31 pediatric patients. The pressures were measured at loss of resistance, immediately after the bolus dose of local anesthetic (1 ml/kg), and at 15-s intervals up to 3 min. RESULTS: The pressure at loss of resistance was 35.6 ± 27.8 mmHg. A pulsatile waveform was observed once the epidural space was accessed. The pressure after administration of the local anesthetic bolus (1 ml/kg 0.2 % ropivacaine/bupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine) was 192.5 ± 93.3 mmHg. The pressure decreased to 51.5 ± 39.0 mmHg at 15 s, 26.9 ± 9.9 mmHg after 2 min, and 24.7 ± 11.7 after 3 min. The return to baseline occurred at approximately 45-60 s. CONCLUSIONS: Following the administration of the local anesthetic into the caudal epidural space, there was a marked, but transient, increase in the pressure within the epidural space. It appears unlikely that a slow epidural catheter infusion could lead to a sustained increase in epidural pressure.

Lumbar interlaminar epidural injections are superior to caudal epidural injections in managing lumbar central spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Epidural injections are performed to manage lumbar central spinal stenosis pain utilizing caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal approaches. The literature on the efficacy of epidural injections in managing lumbar central spinal stenosis pain is sparse; lacking multiple, high quality randomized trials with long-term follow-up. METHODS: Two randomized controlled trials of the caudal and lumbar interlaminar approaches that assessed 220 patients with lumbar central spinal stenosis were analyzed. RESULTS: The analysis found efficacy for both caudal and interlaminar approaches in managing chronic pain and disability from central spinal stenosis was demonstrated. In the patients responsive to treatment, those with at least 3 weeks of improvement with the first 2 procedures, 51% reported significant improvement with caudal epidural injections, whereas it was 84% with local anesthetic only with interlaminar epidurals, 57% with caudal and 83% with lumbar interlaminar with local anesthetic with steroid. The response rate was 38% with caudal and 72% with lumbar interlaminar with local anesthetic only and 44% with caudal and 73% with lumbar interlaminar with local anesthetic with steroid when all patients were considered. In the interlaminar approach, results were superior for pain relief and functional status with fewer nonresponsive patients compared to the caudal approach. LIMITATIONS: The data was derived from 2 previously published randomized, controlled trials rather than comparing 2 techniques in one randomized controlled trial. Further, the randomized controlled trials were active control trials without a placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this assessment showed significant improvement in patients suffering with chronic lumbar spinal stenosis with caudal and interlaminar epidural approaches with local anesthetic only, or with steroids in a long-term follow-up of up to 2 years, in contemporary interventional pain management setting, with the interlaminar approach providing significantly better results.

Infiltración del ganglio impar y caudal en el manejo de la coccigodinia traumática rebelde al tratamiento analgésico convencional / Infiltration of ganglion impar and caudal in the management of traumatic coccydynia refractory to conventional analgesic treatment

Introducción. La coccigodinia es un término referido al dolor en la región del cóccix. La mayor parte de casos se asocian a una movilidad anormal del cóccix que puede provocar un proceso crónico inflamatorio que conduce a la degeneración de esta estructura. El tratamiento conservador debe ser de elección en este cuadro, y puede consistir en terapias manuales (masajes, estiramiento, manipulación y postural) inyecciones locales de esteroides o anestésicos. Material y métodos. Estudio retrospectivo de una cohorte histórica de 23 pacientes con clínica de coccigodinia traumática sin respuesta a tratamiento médico. Se trataron con infiltración del ganglio impar y/o bloqueo caudal con lidocaina 1% y triancinolona 60-80mg bajo control radioscópico. De estos 23 pacientes, 21 estaban disponibles y completaron un cuestionario de evaluación del efecto de la infiltración del ganglio impar el bloque y/o el bloque caudal. Resultados. Se consideraron excelentes los resultados obtenidos en 16 de los 21 pacientes con coccigodinia traumática. En cinco pacientes los resultados eran moderados o pobres, aunque ninguno describiera aumento o empeoramiento del dolor después de las infiltraciones. El procedimiento no se asoció a complicaciones mayores. Conclusión. El bloqueo del ganglio impar y/o el bloqueo caudal conllevó un control del dolor coccígeo en la mayoría de pacientes (AU)

Introduction. Coccydynia is a term that refers to pain in the region of the coccyx. Most cases are associated with abnormal mobility of the coccyx which may trigger a chronic inflammatory process leading to degeneration of this structure. Non-surgical management remains the gold standard treatment for coccydynia, consisting of decreased sitting, seat cushioning, coccygeal massage, stretching, manipulation, local injection of steroids or anaesthetics, and postural adjustments. Material and methods. A retrospective study of 23 patients who underwent treatment for coccydynia and failed to respond to conservative management. They were treated by radiologically guided infiltration of the ganglion blockade impar and/or caudal blockade with 1% lidocaine 60-80mg triamcinolone. Of these 23 patients, 21 were available for clinical review and completed a questionnaire giving their assessment of the effect of the infiltration of the ganglion impar block and/or caudal block. Results. Good results were obtained in 16 of the 21 patients with coccydynia due to trauma. In five patients the results were moderate or poor, although none described worse pain after the operation. They are no complications after the infiltration. Conclusion. Ganglion impar block and/or caudal block offered satisfactory relief of pain in the majority of patients regardless of the cause of their symptoms (AU)

Aspectos técnicos en la infiltración caudal guiada por tomografía computarizada / Technical aspects of CT guided caudal infiltration

Introducción. La infiltración epidural caudal constituye en la actualidad una de las técnicas de analgesia regional que se utiliza con más frecuencia para el dolor crónico lumbar. Nuestro objetivo principal a alcanzar en esta exposición es poner de relieve una nueva técnica para realizar esta intervención que resulta más sencilla y menos agresiva para el paciente que la utilizada clásicamente. Material y métodos. Esta técnica se ha realizado en 13 pacientes (2 varones y 11 mujeres), con edades comprendidas entre los 33 y los 84 años. Todos los pacientes tenían dolor lumbar crónico. Para realizarla se ha utilizado un equipo de tomografía computarizada (TC) General Electric Light Speed 16, una aguja de punción lumbar de 22G y las medidas estériles adecuadas. La TC es una herramienta que facilita enormemente la visualización del ligamento sacrocoxígeo. Una vez introducida la aguja y comprobado mediante TC que se encuentre en el interior del canal raquídeo caudal, se procede a girar el bisel en dirección craneal con el objetivo de que el fármaco administrada salga por el orificio de la aguja hacia el canal neural. Discusión. La técnica más frecuente en la práctica de la infiltración epidural caudal se realiza habitualmente con el paciente en decúbito prono, con la cabeza girada sobre un lado utilizando un arco de rayos X. Mediante la técnica que mostramos, la punción es menos agresiva, más rápida y hay menos posibilidades de complicaciones. El riesgo de perforar el saco dural es prácticamente inexistente, así como de producir hematomas o infecciones, debido a que la manipulación con la aguja es mucho menor y se ciñe únicamente a una punción directa. Discusión. En el 100% de los casos en que se ha practicado nuestra técnica, la difusión de la medicación administrada se ha realizado en dirección craneal, lo cual se ha verificado debido al contraste que se ha añadido a la mezcla farmacológica (AU)

Introduction. Caudal epidural infiltration is currently one of the most used regional analgesia techniques for control of chronic low pack pain. Our primary objective in this presentation is to highlight a new technique for performing this intervention which is simpler and less aggressive for the patient than that classically used. Material and methods. This new technique has been used on 13 patients (2 males and 11 females) between 33 and 84 years. All patients had chronic lumbar pain. A General Electric Light Speed 16 CT scanner, a 22G lumbar puncture needle and appropriate sterile measures, were used to perform the technique. The CT scanner is a tool that makes it much easier to visualise the sacrococcygeal ligament. After the needle is introduced, and checked using CT, into the caudal spinal canal, the bevel is turned in the cranial direction in order that the medication administered comes out of the needle orifice towards the neural canal. Discussion. The most common technique for performing caudal epidural infiltration is usually done in the prone position with the head turned to one side using an X-ray arch. Using this technique we show that the puncture is less aggressive, quicker and with fewer possibilities of complications. The risk of perforating the dural sac is practically non-existent. There is also less risk of producing haematomas or infections, due to there being much less manipulation of the needle and only involves a direct puncture. Discussion. In the 100% of cases on which our technique has been performed, the diffusion of the administered medication has been made in the cranial direction, which has been verified using contrast added to the pharmacological mixture (AU)

Evidence-based clinical update: Which local anesthetic drug for pediatric caudal block provides optimal efficacy with the fewest side effects?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this evidence-based clinical update is to identify the best evidence when selecting a long-acting local anesthetic agent for single-shot pediatric caudal anesthesia in children. METHODS: A structured literature search was conducted using PubMed and Medline (OVID) using the terms "caudal" and combinations of at least two of "bupivacaine", "ropivacaine", and "levobupivacaine". The search limits included "randomized controlled trials" (RCTs), "meta-analysis", "evidence-based reviews" or "reviews", "human", and "all child: 0-18 yr". Seventeen RCTs were identified that concerned single-shot pediatric caudal anesthesia with at least two of the three drugs in question. Data were extracted for the areas of clinical efficacy and side effects. Study findings were assigned levels of evidence, and grades of recommendation were made according to Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine criteria. RESULTS: The three drugs investigated were found to be equivalent in terms of efficacy. Evidence showed bupivacaine with the highest incidence of motor block and ropivacaine with the lowest. Adverse effects were rare and unrelated to the choice of drug. There were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: None of the three agents was shown to be superior in terms of efficacy. Bupivacaine is preferred if motor block is desired, ropivacaine is preferred if motor block is to be minimized. Adverse effects in human studies are rare, mild, and unrelated to the choice of drug. Despite encountering the absence of serious adverse events in each of the studies reviewed, it is noted that animal studies suggest a safer profile with ropivacaine or levobupivacaine than with bupivacaine.

[Evaluation of the adequacy of analgesia using sensometry method during sacral anesthesia in proctological operations].

Adequacy of epidural-sacral anesthesia in proctological operations was studied. Sensometry occupies a special place among the methods, estimating the sacral anesthesia adequacy, owing the advantage of possibility for quantitative estimation of such an important index, as a patient reaction on external irritants, including such of a pain. Sensometry, according to A. K. Sangaylo method, using portative apparatus "Nil - 3" was conducted in 50 patients while proctological operations performance for estimation of various variants of sacral anesthesia efficacy. There was established, that sensometry constitutes the most informative quantitative method of estimation of the anesthesia adequacy.

Caudal epidural block versus other methods of postoperative pain relief for circumcision in boys.

BACKGROUND: Techniques to minimize the postoperative discomfort of penile surgery, such as circumcision, include caudal block; penile block; systemic opioids and topical local anaesthetic cream, emulsion or gel. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of caudal epidural analgesia with other forms of postoperative analgesia following circumcision in boys. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 1), MEDLINE (to April 2008) and EMBASE (to April 2008). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized and quasi-randomized trials of postoperative analgesia by caudal epidural block compared with non-caudal analgesia in boys, aged between 28 days and 16 years, having elective surgery for circumcision. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently carried out assessment of study eligibility, data extraction and assessment of the risk of bias in included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 trials involving 721 boys. No difference was seen between caudal and parenteral analgesia in the need for rescue or other analgesia (relative risk (RR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 1.43; 4 trials, 235 boys; random-effects model) or on the incidence of nausea and vomiting (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.05; 4 trials, 235 boys). No difference in the need for rescue or other analgesia was seen for caudal compared with dorsal nerve penile block (DNPB) (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.44; 4 trials, 336 boys; random-effects model). No differences were seen between caudal block and DNPB in the incidence of nausea and vomiting (RR 1.88, 95% CI 0.70 to 5.04; 4 trials, 334 boys; random effects model) or individual complications except for motor block (RR 17.00, 95% CI 1.01 to 286.82; 1 trial, 100 boys) and motor or leg weakness (RR 10.67, 95% CI 1.32 to 86.09; 2 trials, 107 boys). These were significantly more common in the caudal block groups than with DNPB. No differences were seen between caudal and rectal or intravenous analgesia in the need for rescue analgesia or any other outcomes (2 trials, 162 boys). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the need for rescue or other analgesia could not be detected between caudal, parenteral and penile block methods. In day-case surgery, penile block may be preferable to caudal block in children old enough to walk due to the possibility of temporary leg weakness after caudal block. Evidence from trials is limited by small numbers and poor methodology. There is a need for properly designed trials comparing caudal epidural block with other methods such as morphine, simple analgesics and topical local anaesthetic creams, emulsions or gels.

Is a fall in baseline heart rate a reliable predictor of a successful single shot caudal epidural in children?

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to investigate whether a fall in heart rate (HR) with injection of local anesthetic into the caudal space can be used as a predictor of correct needle placement. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty pediatric patients undergoing infraumbilical surgery were recruited to the study. After induction of general anesthesia, baseline HR was recorded and caudal block was performed using 0.75-1 ml x kg(-1) 0.25% bupivacaine, which was injected at a rate of 1 ml x 3 s(-1). The change in HR while injecting an initial 0.2 ml x kg(-1) of drug and during total drug injection was recorded. HR reduction of > or = 3 b x min(-1) was considered a positive test for correct needle placement. The success of block was judged by HR response to skin incision, endtidal halothane concentration required for maintenance of anesthesia and postoperative pain scores. RESULTS: Caudal block was successful in 209/220 (95%) patients. Mean HR following the initial drug injection (111 +/- 17.7, P < 0.01) and entire drug injection (108.8 +/- 17.2, P < 0.01) was significantly lower than baseline (116.2 +/- 17.5). HR reduction of > or = 3 b x min(-1) was present in 190/209 and 199/209 successful block following initial drug injection and total drug injection respectively. The analysis of study data showed that a fall in HR is a predictor of successful caudal block, with a sensitivity of 90.9%, specificity of 100% and a positive predictive value of 100% after initial injection of local anesthetic. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that decrease in HR with drug injection is a simple, objective and reliable test to predict success of caudal block.

Analgesic efficacy of caudal block versus diclofenac suppository and local anesthetic infiltration following pediatric laparoscopy.

AIM: To compare the analgesic efficacy of caudal block with diclofenac suppository and local anesthetic infiltration in children undergoing laparoscopy. METHODS: We studied 50 children undergoing laparoscopy for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. Their ages ranged from 3 to 13 years, and all belonged to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class I or II. Anesthesia was carried out using the standard procedure. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups. Group 1 received caudal block with bupivacaine 1 mL/kg after anesthetic induction. Group 2 received diclofenac suppository 3 mg/kg postinduction and local anesthetic infiltration at the port sites at the end of the procedure. Pain was assessed using the Hannallah objective pain scale at 15, 30, 60, 120, and 360 minutes postextubation. RESULTS: The pain scores were comparable in both groups at all times. Twelve percent of caudal block patients and 20% of diclofenac patients needed rescue analgesic, a statistically insignificant difference. In 2 patients, caudal block was technically difficult and they were excluded from the study. The incidence of side effects was low in our study. CONCLUSION: We find the analgesic efficacy of diclofenac suppository combined with local anesthetic infiltration at port sites comparable to caudal block. Given the necessarily invasive nature of caudal block, we suggest the combined use of diclofenac suppository with local anesthetic infiltration at port sites as a useful and more economical alternative for analgesia following pediatric laparoscopy.

Day case transurethral prostatectomy in Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: Caudal block regional anaesthesia has been used over the years for out-patient procedures, and in transurethral resection of the prostate gland in Nigeria since 1995. In a preliminary study involving 10 selected patients undergoing TURP, spontaneous voiding resumed on the operative day, and their discharge on the same day did not in any way lead to any adverse events. This larger series further confirms the safety of transurethral resection of the prostate gland as a day case procedure. METHOD: One hundred and eighty patients with obstructing benign prostatic enlargement on urethral catheter drainage with prostate glands weighing 60g or less on ultrasound assessment, were subjected to transurethral resection of the prostate gland (TURP) as day-cases under caudal block regional anesthesia using 2% xylocaine with 1 in 80,000 adrenaline. Hemostasis was secured until effluent of the irrigation fluid from the bladder was totally free of any visible trace of blood. A catheter was not inserted postoperatively. The patients were discharged on the same day after they had satisfactorily voided. RESULTS: These patients resumed spontaneous voiding postoperatively before discharge on the operative day. Their discharge on the same day did not in any way lead to any adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: With a better understanding of the anatomy of the innervations and blood supply of the prostate gland, and proper patient selection, this larger series has confirmed that day-case TURP without postoperative catheterization can now be safely added to the list of day case procedures.

Caudal epidural block versus other methods of postoperative pain relief for circumcision in boys.

BACKGROUND: Circumcision is a commonly performed surgical procedure in boys and caudal analgesia is frequently used to minimize discomfort of penile surgery postoperatively. For humanitarian and physiological reasons pain should be anticipated and effectively controlled while ensuring patient safety. Several non-caudal analgesic techniques can be used including: penile block, systemic opioids and topical local anaesthetic cream,emulsion or gel. OBJECTIVES: To compare the relative efficacy and side effects of caudal epidural analgesia with other forms of postoperative analgesia following circumcision in boys. SEARCH STRATEGY: CENTRAL, MEDLINE (from 1966), and EMBASE are searched using MeSH headings: Circumcision, Anesthesia-Caudal, Pediatric or Child, and the text words circumcision and caudal. Bibliographies of published trials and conference proceedings are also reviewed. Date of last search: December 2002. SELECTION CRITERIA: Published randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials in which postoperative analgesia by caudal epidural block is compared with a non-caudal method of analgesia, in boys whose mean age is between 28 days and 16 years, having elective surgery for circumcision. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials identified from searching are assessed for inclusion and data extracted independently by two reviewers. Review Manager software is used for calculation of the treatment effect, represented by relative risks (RR), using a fixed effects model with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials of average quality involving 374 patients are included in this review. Only two comparisons of caudal analgesia have been investigated; parenteral analgesics in six trials, and penile block in one trial. Although some trial heterogeneity is evident this does not reach statistical significance. The need for rescue analgesia is reduced when caudal analgesia is compared with parenteral medications,((RR 0.32(0.16,0.63)). The incidence of nausea and vomiting is decreased in caudal patients compared with those receiving parenteral analgesics (RR 0.57 (0.35-0.93)) but not with those receiving penile block. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Few studies compare caudal analgesia with other commonly available methods of analgesia in boys having circumcision surgery. Although the need for rescue analgesia is reduced in the early postoperative period when caudal is compared with parenteral analgesia,evidence from trials may no longer reflect current practice and is limited by small numbers and poor methodology. There is a need for properly designed trials to study the relative efficacy of caudal epidural with other methods such as penile block, morphine, simple analgesics and topical local anaesthetic cream,emulsions or gel.

Regional anesthesia is a good alternative to general anesthesia in pediatric surgery: Experience in 1,554 children.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Although caudal and spinal blocks are modern and safe techniques, in many centers children still are operated on under general anesthesia (GA), or the blocks are used for postoperative analgesia after GA in infraumbilical operations. The authors aimed to document the results and the complications of 1,554 regional anesthesia cases, thereby assessing their validity. METHODS: The analysis of 1,459 caudal and 95 spinal blocks cases collected until January 2001 in children from newborn to 12 years of age are documented retrospectively. The types of anesthesia analyzed in the study were caudal block (CB) only, CB plus GA, GA plus CB, GA plus spinal block, and spinal block only. RESULTS: There were 1,338 caudal and 95 spinal block cases that clinically were satisfactory. Because the duration of CB was not sufficient in 39 cases, GA was used. Failure to produce a CB occurred in 82 cases (5.57%). There were 257 of 1,338 patients operated on under GA and supported by caudal block for postoperative analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: Caudal anesthesia seems to be an inexpensive, simple, and effective technique not only as a supplement for postoperative analgesia, but also as a single method of anesthesia. and the authors recommend its use in a wider setting of clinical entities in infraumbilical surgical procedures of children.

Experience with caudal block regional anesthesia for transurethral resection of the prostate gland.

Ninety five consecutive patients with obstructing prostatic enlargement requiring surgery underwent caudal anesthesia for transurethral resection of the prostate gland (TURP). Their mean age was 73 +/- 7.8 years, the mean preoperative volume of the prostate gland was 160cc and the mean resection time was 97.3 +/- 30 minutes. The anesthesia was satisfactory with a mean pain score of 0.3 +/- 0.6 on the 0-10 pain rating scale. No complication of the anesthetic procedure occurred. Ten patients were discharged free of catheter on the same day while all the remaining 85 patients were discharged within 48 hours of surgery. It is concluded that caudal anesthesia with 2% xylocaine with 1 in 80,000 adrenaline gives adequate anesthesia for transurethral resection of the prostate gland.

[The treatment of epithelial coccygeal cyst]. / Lechenie épitelial'nogo kopchikovogo khoda.

The dissection of coccygeal duct and closing the wound with a through perforated bathing drainage under modified epidural-sacral anaesthesia has been clinically approved. The operation was performed 3-4 days after two-step opening and cleaning of the abscess. The epithelial duct that doesn't have abscess symptoms should be dissected in one step operation. 68 patients underwent one-step surgery and in 125 cases two-step surgery has been done. The average time of staying in hospital was 15.3 days and 19.1 days, respectively. The double-step surgery of epithelial coccygeal duct decreases the level of postoperative septic complications and improves the functional and cosmetic results of the treatment.

Topical anaesthesia for bladder biopsies and cautery: intravesical lidocaine versus caudal anaesthesia.

A total of 62 patients were randomized to receive bladder biopsy and cautery with either topical lidocaine anaesthesia or caudal anaesthesia. The patients were asked to describe the level of pain experienced during the procedure on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 5 (unbearable pain). In 29 patients receiving topical lidocaine anaesthesia, the mean value was 1.6 at cold-cup biopsies and 2.7 at cautery, which were considered to be tolerable for the patients. On the other hand, in 33 patients who had biopsies and cautery with caudal anaesthesia, the mean values were 0.8 and 1.0, respectively, which were significantly lower than those in patients receiving topical anaesthesia (p < 0.01). Serum lidocaine levels were measured in 5 patients at 15 minutes from the beginning of biopsies, and were negligible. These results revealed that caudal anaesthesia provided more effective pain relief, although most patients could tolerate biopsy and cautery with topical lidocaine anaesthesia. The technique of topical anaesthesia is very simple and no side effects were observed. We thus conclude that topical lidocaine anaesthesia is useful and safe for bladder biopsies and cautery in most cases.

[Loco-regional anesthesia in proctological surgery]. / Anesthésie loco-régionale en chirurgie proctologique.

Among the various techniques of anaesthesia, local anaesthesia, posterior perineal block and caudal block allow most of the surgical procedures involving the anal canal to be performed. Practical modalities of the various techniques, choice of drugs and selection of the various indications are reported.