[Technical difficulties in epidural blocks and spinal bleeding complications]. / Difficoltá techniche nell'esecuzione dei blocchi centrali e complicanze emorragiche spinali.

The clinical cases of two patients with neurological complications following neuroaxial blocks are reported. The events took place in different institutions where thousands of central blocks were yearly performed. In both instances the blocking procedures presented technical difficulties needing repeated lumbar punctures. The first case concerns a patient receiving anticoagulant and fibrinolytic therapy for vascular pathology. This 89 year-old female experienced severe cord compression requiring surgical decompression and laminectomy. The second case regards a patient with previous minor surgical procedure requiring postoperative antiinflammatory treatment. This 74 year-old male experienced subarachnoid hemorrhage and spinal/epidural hematoma as shown by NMR. The symptoms regressed with steroid therapy. The authors emphasise the risks of mechanical trauma of epidural or spinal anesthesia both during positioning or removal of an epidural catheter. The problem related to the compatibility between central blocks and antithrombotic/anticoagulant prophylaxis/therapy is now of primary concern and has led to publications about guide lines on this topic. If central block is carried out in patients with bleeding diathesis it is mandatory to co-ordinate multidisciplinary assistance for early detection of significant symptoms of the above described complications and subsequent treatment.

Incidence of hypotension and bradycardia during integrated epidural/general anaesthesia. An epidemiologic observational study on 1200 consecutive patients. Italian Study Group on Integrated Anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Combined epidural/general anaesthesia might theoretically emphasise the cardiovascular effects of epidural block alone. The goal of the present investigation was to evaluate the incidence of both hypotension and bradycardia during integrated epidural/general anaesthesia in a multicentric, observational study. METHODS: The incidence of clinical hypotension (systolic arterial blood pressure decrease by 30% or more from baseline), and bradycardia (heart rate < 50 beats/min) and other side effects have been evaluated in 1200 consecutive patients receiving integrated epidural/general anaesthesia. The time from induction of epidural anaesthesia to induction of general anaesthesia was considered as preoperative; while the time after general anaesthesia induction was considered as intraoperative. RESULTS: Preoperatively hypotension developed in 85 patients (2.8%), and bradycardia in 54 patients (4.5%). Intraoperatively, hypotension was observed in 380 patients (31.6%), and bradycardia in 153 patients (12.7%). Hypotension and bradycardia were not influenced by the type of surgical procedure, the type of maintenance of general anaesthesia (inhalational versus total intravenous general anaesthesia) and the level of epidural block (lumbar versus thoracic); but they were more frequent in patients with ASA physical status II and III-IV compared to patients with ASA physical status I (p < 0.05). Prophylactic volume preload decreased the incidence of hypotension from 41.5% to 22.4% (p < 0.0001), while prophylactic atropine before epidural block did not affect the incidence of bradycardia. Patients receiving epidural clonidine showed an increased incidence of intraoperative bradycardia compared to those who did not receive it (p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Randomized, controlled studies should be advocated in order to compare the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia during integrated anaesthesia and during epidural block alone. Our results demonstrated that the use of integrated epidural/general anaesthesia produces an incidence of perioperative hypotension and bradycardia similar to that reported when central blocks are used alone.

[Patient-controlled postoperative analgesia in orthopedic surgery: epidural PCA versus intravenous PCA]. / Analgesia postoperatoria controllata dal paziente in chirurgia ortopedica: PCA epidurale versus PCA endovenosa.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate both effectiveness and incidence of side effects of two techniques of postoperative pain treatment: intravenous and epidural PCA. DESIGN: Prospective analysis of data from two groups of randomized patients. SETTINGS: Orthopedic and trauma center. PATIENTS: Figty ASA class II-III patients undergoing total hip replacement under combined Spinal-Epidural Anesthesia. METHODS: Patients were divided into 2 groups who received different postoperative pain treatment. One group (group PCA) received a patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine 30 mg and ketorolac 90 mg in 100 ml of saline (back-ground infusion 2-4 ml, according to body weith, bolus 1 ml, lockout 5 min, 4 h dose limit 40 ml). PCEA group received a patient-controlled epidural analgesia with morphine 4 mg and bupivacaine 0.125% 100 ml, (background infusion 3-4 ml, according to patient' height, bolus 1 ml, lockout 10 min, 4 h dose limit 25 ml). Postoperative pain intensity was evaluated, through 24 postoperative hours, by a verbal analogue scale (VPS = 0 to 3) and a total pain score (TOTPAR) was calculated for each patient at 6 and 24 postoperative hours. Side effects were recorded and their incidence was obtained for each group. Statistical data analysis was performed by one-way ANOVA and non-parametric tests for ordinal data. Nominal data were analyzed by chi 2 test. p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Patient receiving PCEA showed a significant (p < 0.005) decrease of incident pain, while VPS at rest was similar in the two groups. TOTPAR VPS was lower (p < 0.05) in PCEA group both at 6 and 24 postoperative hours. Somnolence was observed more often in PCA patients (8% vs 2%; p 0.05), while no significant differences were noted among other side effects incidence. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show a better control of postoperative pain arising from total hip replacement during PCEA when compared to PCA. It should be emphasized that incident pain is far more decreased by PCEA, so that this technique is particularly indicated when an early postoperative mobilization is required.