CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Holmstrom, B.
Right arrow Articles by Hallberg, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Holmstrom, B.
Right arrow Articles by Hallberg, S.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 40, 601-606, Copyright © 1993 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

Combined spinal epidural block versus spinal and epidural block for orthopaedic surgery

B Holmstrom, K Laugaland, N Rawal and S Hallberg
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Lindesbergs Hospital, Sweden.

In a controlled study a single segment combined spinal epidural (CSE) block was compared with spinal or epidural block for major orthopaedic surgery. Seventy-five patients, age 52-86 yr, were randomly assigned to receive one of the three blocks. Bupivacaine 0.5% was used for surgical analgesia. The postoperative pain relief after 4.0 mg epidural morphine was compared with the analgesic effect of 0.2 or 0.4 mg morphine administered intrathecally. With the spinal technique good or excellent surgical analgesia and muscle relaxation were achieved rapidly (11.8 +/- 1.1 min). The time taken to provide an equally effective and reliable block with the CSE technique was no longer (14.9 +/- 2.2 min). For epidural block with the catheter technique more time was required (35.9 +/- 3.9 min) to provide acceptable surgical conditions (P < 0.05). Perioperative sedatives and concomitant analgesics were required more frequently and in larger doses by the patients undergoing surgery with epidural block (P < 0.05) than with CSE or spinal block. Our study demonstrated that the analgesia after surgery provided by 0.2 and 0.4 mg morphine administered intrathecally was comparable to that provided by 4.0 mg of epidural morphine. It is concluded that the analgesia and surgical conditions provided by the spinal and CSE blocks were similar and were superior to those provided by an epidural block.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
T. Ezri, I. Zahalka, D. Zabeeda, Z. Feldbrin, A. Eidelman, R. Zimlichman, B. Medalion, and S. Evron
Similar incidence of hypotension with combined spinal-epidural or epidural alone for knee arthroplasty: [L'anesthesie rachidienne et peridurale combinee, et peridurale seule, ont une incidence similaire d'hypotension lors de l'arthroplastie du genou]
Can J Anesth, February 1, 2006; 53(2): 139 - 145.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
S. Ko, D. H. Goldstein, and E. G. VanDenKerkhof
Definitions of "respiratory depression" with intrathecal morphine postoperative analgesia: a review of the literature: [Definitions de la "depression respiratoire" de l'analgesie postoperatoire realisee avec de la morphine intrathecale : une revue documentaire]
Can J Anesth, August 1, 2003; 50(7): 679 - 688.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
N. Rawal
Analgesia for day-case surgery
Br. J. Anaesth., July 1, 2001; 87(1): 73 - 87.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.