LUMBAR SPINAL SUBARACHNOID BLOCK FOR CAESAREAN SECTION-A REVIEW OF 200 CASES

Authors

  • Syed Mushtaq Ahmad Gilani
  • Bashir Ahmad

Abstract

Lumbar spinal subarachnoid block is simple, cheap and effective method of anaesthesia for infraumblicalsurgical procedures. In the present atmosphere of cost consciousness, spinal subarachnoid block is cost effective andcan be of advantage in the developing countries like ours, where the medical gases and expert anesthesiologists arethe rare commodities and deficiently available in the remote areas. Subarachnoid analgesia is entering into itscentennial anniversary; this year as the first successful block was performed by August Bier in 1899 in Germany. Inthe present study the management of 200 cases of lower segment caesarian section under spinal subarachnoid blockis presented and the advantages discussed. There was a low incidence of vomiting (9%) and no chances of aspirationeven in the emergency nature of caesarian section. Cardiovascular side effects can be avoided by routine preloadingwith I. V fluids and the incidence of headache and backache can be reduced by using a small gauge L/P needle as ismanifest in the present study. Spinal subarachnoid block has the advantage of the prolonged postoperative analgesiawhich can be prolonged further by adding narcotic analgesic to the local drug. In the present study, authors usedhyperbaric local analgesic Cinchocaine (1:200 in 6 % glucose) which has a definite spread of analgesia. Spinalanalgesia has the additional advantage of very low chances of foetal depression and the 84.47c babies born aftercaesarian section under spinal block has normal Apgar score. The authors would recommend lumber spinalsubarachnoid block with all its advantages both on the maternal side as well as on the foetal side.

References

Richard J. Personal Communication. 3rd SACA

congress (Islamabad). Dec. 1997.

Bier A. Versuche uber cocainisirung des ruchenmarkes.

Deutsche Zeitschrift fur Chirurgic, 1899; 51:361.

Translated and reprinted in "Classical file” Survey of

Anesthesiology, 1962; 6:352.

Sakhi A. Spinal anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia

for elective caesarean section. Pakistan J.

Anesthesiology, 1994; XI: 6.

Lock & Greiss FC Jr. Anesthetic hazards in obstetrics.

Amer. J. Gynec. 1955:70: 861.

Apgar V, Holladay DA, James LS. et al. Comparison of

regional and general anesthesia in obstetrics. JAMA.

; 165:2155.

Philip KG. The relative effect of obstetric anesthesia

and analgesia upon the promptness of neonatal

respiration. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1959; 77: 133.

Benson RC, Shubeck F, Clarke WM, et al. Fetal

compromise during elective cesarean section. Am J

Obstet Gynecol, 1965; 91:645.

Abboud TK. Bilkian A, Nourished R, et al. Neonatal

effect of maternal hypotension during spinal anesthesia

as evaluated by a new test. Anesthesiology, 1983: 59:

A421.

Kamra GL. Spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

Ind. J. Anaesth, 1966; 14:198.

Kapoor YR, Gupta S. Kochhar SK, Kalra JS, Singh P.

Anaesthesia for caesarean section comparison between

general anaesthesia and spinal analgesia. Ind. J.

Anaesth, 1979; 27:316

Iqbal B. Indication and outcome of forceps deliveries in

a teaching hospital. JAMC. 1996; 8:15.

Dierker LJ Jr, Rosen MG, Thomson K, Debanne S &

Linn P. The mid forceps; Maternal and neonatal

outcome. Am. J Obstet Gynecol, 1985; 152: 176.

Neuman C, Foster AD & Rovenstine EA. The

importance of compensating vasoconstriction in

anaesthetized areas in the maintenance of blood

pressure during spinal anaesthesia. J. Clin. Investing,

; 24: 345.

Lang J, Jayasinghe C, Woodson L, Ahmad M, Mathru

M. Failure to prevent hypotension after spinal

anesthesia for elective cesarean section despite

crystalloid or colloid preload augmentation is probably

mediated by atrial natriuretic peptide. Anesthesiology.

;85: A904.

Buggy DJ. O’Brien D, Higgins P, Moran C.

O’Donovan F, McCarroll M. Crystalloid, colloid or no

preload for prevention of spinal anesthesia induced

hypotension in the elderly. Anesthesiology 1996: 85:

Al 10.

Qadri AM, Mankeswar HJ. Role of methergine in

preventing hypotension of spinal analgesia. Ind. J.

Anaesth, 1984; 32: 134.

Greene NM. Physiology of spinal anaesthesia. 1st.

edition. William Wilkins, Baltimore. 1958.

Liu SS, Ware PD, Allen HW, Neal JM & Pollock JE.

Dose response characteristics of spinal bupivacaine in

volunteers. Anesthesiology; 1996; 85: 729

Steven RA, Beardsley D, White JL, et al. Does spinal

anesthesia result in a more complete sympathetic block

than epidural anesthesia? Anesthesiology, 1995; 82:

Jayaram A, Carp H, Morro D. Chronic administration

of the hormones of pregnancy renders female rats more

sensitive to the hypotensive effect of intrathecal

bupivacaine. Anesthesiology, 1996; 85: A884.

Lederman RP, Me Cann DS, Work B Jr & Huber MJ.

Endogenous plasma epinephrine and norepinephrine in

last trimester pregnancy and labour. Am. J. Obstet

Gynecol. 1977; 129: 5.

Clark RB. Thompson DS. & Thompson CH. Prevention

of spinal hypotension associated with caesarean

section. Anesthesiology, 1976; 45: 670.

Ueyama H, Tanigami H. He YL, Mashimo T, Yoshiya

I. Crystalloid preloading has little expanding effect on

circulating blood volume in patients undergoing

cesarean section. Anesthesiology, 1996; 85: A901.

Hodges RJH & Tunstall ME. Recent advances in

anaesthesia and analgesia. 9th ed. Hewer CL, London

Churchill 1963.

Landa S, Bloing R. Stanee A. Variation in surgical

technique affect the incidence of nausea and

vomiting during cesarean section. Anesthesiology.

: 85: A877.

Matsushige DK, Horlocker TT. Me Gregor DG,

Schroeder DR. Neurologic complications of spinal

anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1996; 85: A730.

Rajuriya SS, Matthews KA, Memdiratta OP, Gupta PP.

Comparison of Centbucridine and lignocaine for spinal

analgesia. Ind. J. Anaesth,1984;32:75.

Navaneetham J, Eapen MTP, Job T. Comparative

evaluation of marcaine, carbocaine and xylocaine in

spinal analgesia. Asian Arch. Anaesth. & Resus. 1977;

VII: 35.

Saxena RS, Khurana JS & Arora MV. Post spinal

headache. Ind. J. Anaesth. 1966; 14: 233.

Greene NM. Distribution of local anesthetic solution

within the subarachnoid space. Anesth. Analg, 1985;

: 715.

Richardson MG, Wissler RN. Density of lumbar

cerebrospinal fluid in pregnant and non-pregnant

humans. Anesthesiology, 1996; 85: 326.

Steinstra R, Van Poorten JF. The temperature of

bupivacaine 0.5% affects the sensory level of spinal

anesthesia. Anesth Analg, 1988; 67: 272.

Carter B, Wilson E. Pitkanen M & El Tayyab H. 2%

hypobaric lidocaine is inadequate compared to 5%

hyperbaric lidocaine spinal analgesia. Anesthesiology.

; 83: A955.

Palmer CM. Hays RL. Van Marren GA & Alves DM.

Hyperbaric v/s isobaric bupivacaine for subarachnoid

anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Does it make a

difference? Anesthesiology, 1995; 83: A953.

Krukowski JA, Hood DD. Eisenach JC, Mallak KA.

Intrathecal neostigmine for post cesarean section

analgesia: Dose response. Anesthesiology 1996: 85:

A903.