44
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA
RANSIENTneurological symptoms associ-
ated with spinal lidocaine are an important
factor for the popularity of bupivacaine in
injection of bupivacaine, an epidural injection of 3 ml
plain carbonated lidocaine was allowed if the attend-
ing anesthesiologist considered the level of analgesia
inadequate for the planned surgery. The epidural
injection could be repeated at five minutes intervals if
the level of analgesia was still considered inadequate.
Epidural injections of three milliliters lidocaine 2%
could also be used if the spinal block had regressed
before the end of surgery, also at five minute intervals.
Patients who received the epidural injection were
excluded from further analysis of cutaneous levels,
motor block, and duration of motor block after spinal
injection. The perioperative anesthesia was evaluated
as complete, partial or inadequate. Vital signs were
measured every 2.5 min and the patients received an
infusion of 500 ml lactated Ringer’s solution iv before
the spinal injection. A decrease of systolic blood pres-
sure below 100 mm Hg was treated with ephedrine.
Sedation with midazolam and/or fentanyl was given
when judged useful by the anesthesiologist. Patients
were interviewed on the day after the surgery about
their evaluation of the anesthesia for the surgery, on a
0-10 satisfaction scale.
1
T
spinal anesthesia. However, spinal bupiva-
caine has a longer duration of action than lidocaine.
Thus, there is a reason for the interest in using small
doses of bupivacaine in order to make this drug com-
patible with ambulatory surgery.2 Less bupivacaine
leads to less sensory and motor block,2 but the flexi-
bility of a combined spinal-epidural technique could
compensate for this problem.3
However, even when used in small dosage in a
combined spinal-epidural technique, isobaric bupiva-
caine is more appropriate than hyperbaric bupivacaine
but the effect of subsequent injection of lidocaine 2%
into the epidural space is not known4 This led us to
compare 9.75 mg of isobaric and hyperbaric bupiva-
caine used in a combined spinal-epidural technique,
where lidocaine 2% could be injected in the epidural
space when the block was inadequate for surgery, or
has regressed before the end of surgery.
Methods
Following institutional approval and written informed
consent, 60 patients scheduled for elective surgery
were studied. The patients were randomized to two
groups of 30 patients. Patients in group 1 received
9.75 mg isobaric bupivacaine and patients in group 2
received 9.75 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine. The study
was double blind: the patient and the evaluator did
not know what medication was injected. Bupivacaine
0.75% was used, and 1.3 ml of commercial hyperbaric
and plain (isobaric) solutions were injected at L3-4 or
L4-5 in a sitting position through a 27 g pencil point
Whitacre needle with the aperture of the needle
directed cephalad. A 19 g epidural catheter, inserted
3-4 cm cephalad, was left in place and the patients
were placed supine with the operating table in a neu-
tral position.
For the first 40 patients, upper cutaneous levels of
analgesia and motor block were evaluated every five
minutes for 20 min. The measurements were repeated
40 min later and every 15 min until complete recov-
ery of the motor block. For the last 20 patients, to
evaluate two segment regression time, measurements
were repeated every five minutes throughout the
study. The duration in sitting position after the spinal
injection was also noted in these patients. Upper cuta-
neous levels of analgesia were evaluated with a
Wartenberg pinwheel and motor block with the
Bromage scale (3=complete paralysis, 2=movements
of the foot only, 1=small motor block movement of
the knee, 0=no paralysis). Ten minutes after the spinal
A sample of 60 patients was based on an arbitrary
difference of two cutaneous segments in the upper lev-
els of analgesia between the two groups gives a power
of 0.9 to the study. Student’s t tests for unpaired data
were used for comparison of quantitative data, and Chi
square tests for nominal data. A P < 0.05 was consid-
ered significant.
Results
There were no differences between groups in age, sex,
weight, height or in the type and duration of surgery
(Table I). Upper levels of analgesia (Figure 1) and
motor block (Figure 2) occurred more rapidly in the
isobaric group (P < 0.05). However, at 15 min, maxi-
mum upper sensory levels (T7 2) and motor block
were not different. Two segment regression time, time
in the sitting position after spinal injection, complete
motor recovery and the use of ephedrine did not differ
(Table II). The quality of anesthesia, need for intraop-
erative sedation and satisfaction of the patients were
adequate in both groups (Table II). Finally, 39 epidur-
al injections of lidocaine 2% were given to 12 patients
(four in group 1 and eight in group 2) 10 min after
spinal injection. Twenty eight of the reinjections were
in the hyperbaric group (P < 0.05). Twenty six of the
epidural injections produced an increase in sensory
block of 0 or 1 dermatome, and 13, an increase of 2 or
more (mode=0 segment, mean=1.3 in the isobaric
group and 1.2 in the hyperbaric group five minutes
after injection).