A Comparative Evaluation of General Anesthesia versus Spinal Anesthesia Combined with Paravertebral Block for Renal Surgeries: A Randomized Prospective Study

Eldaba, Ahmed A; Amin, Sabry Mohamed

doi:10.4172/2155-6148.1000632

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results are consistent with those of Eldaba and Amin ( 12 ), who observed a significant increase in HR and mean arterial blood pressure (MABP) in the GA group following intubation. This response may be attributed to the stress reaction triggered by laryngoscopy and intubation.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Moreover, Eldaba and Amin (12) this difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Additionally, they found that patients in the CES group had higher levels of patient satisfaction compared to the GA group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Moreover, Eldaba and Amin ( 12 ) reported that in the GA group, patients requested their first painkiller in a shorter amount of time compared to the spinal/epidural group; this difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Additionally, they found that patients in the CES group had higher levels of patient satisfaction compared to the GA group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Safety and Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Combined Segmental Thoracic Spinal Epidural Anesthesia in Abdominal Surgeries and Laparoscopic Procedures: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Study

Elzohry,

Hegab,

Khalifa

et al. 2024

Anesth Pain Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Thoracic segmental spinal anesthesia (SA) may be a good alternative to general anesthesia (GA) for abdominal operations and laparoscopic procedures, especially in high-risk patients. Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of thoracic segmental SA vs GA during abdominal operations and laparoscopic procedures. Methods: This study was conducted at our university hospital and involved a total of 46 patients who underwent abdominal operations and laparoscopic procedures. The study period spanned from January 15, 2022, to October 15, 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups: Group 1 (n = 23) received standard GA, and group 2 (n = 23) received thoracic segmental SA. A combination of 10 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% and 25 μg of fentanyl was injected through the spinal needle. The epidural catheter was then threaded through the Tuohy needle after withdrawal of the spinal needle to keep only 4 cm up in the epidural space. Demographic data, both intra and postoperative hemodynamic parameters, were monitored. Postoperatively, pain in both groups was treated with intravenous (IV) morphine by patient controlled analgesia (PCA), PCA settings were 1 mg morphine/mL, no background infusion, bolus dose 2 mL and lockout interval 15 min. Postoperative, both resting VAS and VAS during cough were measured for all patients at fixed intervals, and all patients were followed up for postoperative complications. Results: No significant variation was found in demographic data. Intra and postoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) measurements were higher in group 1 than in group 2 but without a statistically significant difference (P < 0.029). Early postoperative VAS values and discharge time from the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were significantly reduced in group 2 than in group 1 (P < 0.001). The number of patients asked for analgesia and total opioid consumption were substantially reduced in group 2 than in group 1. Also, the time of the first analgesia request and patient satisfaction were substantially greater in group 2 than in group 1. Conclusions: Combined thoracic spinal/epidural block results in stable hemodynamics, longer postoperative analgesia with fewer side effects, and greater surgeon and patient satisfaction in patients undergoing abdominal operations and laparoscopic procedures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation