A prospective randomized trial comparing the technique of spinal and general anesthesia for lumbar disk surgery: a study of 100 cases

Sadrolsadat, Seyed Hossein; Mahdavi, Ali; Moharari, Reza Shariat; Khajavi, Mohammad Reza; Khashayar, Patricia; Najafi, Atabak; Amirjamshidi, Abbas

doi:10.1016/j.surneu.2008.08.003

Cited by 88 publications

(112 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, damage to the lingual, buccal, and supraorbital nerve, phrenic nerve damage due to extension and rotation of neck, damage to the dorsal nerve of the penis, and recurrent laryngeal nerve damage have also been reported (11,23,30,31). In addition, in the prone position under GA, face, ear, breast, and genital injuries can occur, as well as skin necrosis (1,(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28). In another study, periorbital edema, puffiness in the lips, and contact dermatitis in the face have been mentioned as associated with the prone position in GA (13).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lumbar microdiscectomy under spinal and general anesthesia: a comparative study

Dağıstan¹,

Ökmen²,

Dağıstan³

et al. 2014

Turkish Neurosurgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIm:To compare the safety and efficacy of spinal anesthesia (SA) in patients undergoing lumbar microdiscectomy (LM). mAterIAl and methOds:We evaluated 180 patients who underwent LM between 1 January 2012 and 5 July 2013. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, and pre-, intra-, and postoperative information was determined from the patients' medical records. results:Total anesthetic times were longer in the general anesthesia (GA) group. There was less bleeding at the surgical site in the SA group. Intraoperative blood pressure was significantly also lower in the SA group. Meanwhile, tachycardia was significantly higher in the GA group. The analgesic requirement in post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) was higher in the general anesthesia group. At PACU admission, analgesic requirement, heart rate, and the mean arterial pressure were higher in the GA group. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was more frequent among patients recovering in general anesthesia group. SA patients had an increased incidence of urinary retention compared with GA patients. Pulmonary complications requiring specific treatment were insignificantly higher among GA patients. COnClusIOn:In patients who undergo lumbar disc surgery, SA is a good alternative for experienced surgeons because of a more comfortable healing process.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lumbar microdiscectomy under spinal and general anesthesia: a comparative study

Dağıstan¹,

Ökmen²,

Dağıstan³

et al. 2014

Turkish Neurosurgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…SA is widely used technique for lumbar spine surgery especially for laminectomies (6,9,16,18) but its use for posterior lumbar stabilization surgery has not been reported yet. However, a significant number of patients who present a high surgical risk have undergone posterior lumbar stabilization surgery with GA (12,14).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Posterior lumbar stabilization surgery under spinal anaesthesia for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis, spinal stenosis and lumbar compression fracture

Erbaş

Pusat²,

Yı́lmaz³

et al. 2015

Turkish Neurosurgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIm:Spinal anesthesia is an appropriate technique for lumbar spine surgeries of two to three hours duration. The aim of this study is to document our experience on spinal anesthesia administered to the patients with degenerative lumbar spine. mAterIAl and methOds: A total of 497 patients underwent spinal stabilization surgery with spinal anesthesia for degenerative lumbar spinal disorders in an 8-year period. Spinal anesthesia was performed at the L3-L4 or L4-L5 level and subarachnoid block was achieved with 15 mg of 0.5% plain bupivacaine with 2 µg of fentanyl and 0.2 mg of epinephrine. There was no failure of anesthesia. The patients were closely monitored for complications associated with the SA technique and especially hypotension and bradycardia but no gross alterations in cardiovascular stability were noted. results: Among the 497 patients, 139 were male and 358 were female with a median age of 51 years. The average anesthesia duration was 130 minutes and the average operative time was 85 minutes. In the postoperative period 36 patients has nausea (7.2%) and 18 of them had vomiting (3.6%) that required one dose of antiemetic. No spinal headache was observed and 36 (7.2%) patients complained of urinary retention. All recovered with urinary cannulation within 24 hours. No respiratory complication occurred and no patient died.COnClusIOn: Spinal anesthesia is a safe and effective procedure for the lumbar spinal stabilization surgery, especially in high-riskpatients. Proper precautions should be taken in order to achieve an effective anesthesia for these operations. BulGulAr: Toplam 497 hastanın 139 tanesi erkek, 358 tanesi ise bayandı ve ortalama yaş 51 idi. Ortalama anestezi süresi 130 dakika ve ortalama ameliyat süresi ise 85 dakika olarak hesaplandı. Postoperatif dönemde 36 (%7,2) hastada bulantı oldu ve bunların 18 (%3,6) tanesinde kusma görüldü. Bir doz antiemetik ile düzeldi. Spinal anesteziye bağlı başağrısı hiçbir hastada görülmedi ancak 36 (%7,2) hastada üriner retansiyon görüldü ve bu da 24 saat içinde üriner kanülasyon ile düzeldi. Solunum sıkıntısı görülmedi ve hiçbir hasta ölmedi. sOnuÇ: Spinal anestezi özellikle yüksek riskli hasta grubunda lomber stabilizasyon cerrahisi için güvenli ve etkili bir yöntemdir. Bu tür ameliyatlarda etkin anestezinin sağlanması için uygun tedbirlerin alınması gereklidir.

show abstract

“…In the present case no nausea and vomiting was observed in the postoperative period, as well. Sadrolsadat et al (12) compared spinal and general anesthesia in lumbar disc surgery and indicated that blood loss was less in the spinal anesthesia group and that risks and complications were higher in the general anesthesia group. The present case experienced a blood loss of approximately 800 mL.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anesthesia Management of a Patient with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Tracheal Stenting

Canpolat¹,

Celik²,

Aydın³

et al. 2014

Erciyes Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tracheal stenosis may occur after congenital problems and long-term endotracheal tube compression. Spinal stenosis is one of the 3 most common reasons in patients undergoing surgery due to low back and leg pain. Both general and regional anesthesia are used for lumbar surgery. A 56-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital with low back pain and leg paresthesia. A permanent tracheal stent was placed 11 years ago due to tracheal stenosis developed after tracheostomy performed for anaphylaxis and respiratory depression. Herein, a case of regional anesthesia technique applied during spinal stenosis surgery is presented.

show abstract

A prospective randomized trial comparing the technique of spinal and general anesthesia for lumbar disk surgery: a study of 100 cases

Cited by 88 publications

References 12 publications

Lumbar microdiscectomy under spinal and general anesthesia: a comparative study

Lumbar microdiscectomy under spinal and general anesthesia: a comparative study

Posterior lumbar stabilization surgery under spinal anaesthesia for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis, spinal stenosis and lumbar compression fracture

Anesthesia Management of a Patient with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Tracheal Stenting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About