DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SETTING: Operation theater with postoperative inpatient follow-up.
PATIENTS: The medical records of 315 patients who underwent sequential bilateral TKA were reviewed.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients who received intrathecal levobupicavaine 0.5% were compared with patients who received hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% with fentanyl 25 μg for spinal anesthesia.
MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the use of rescue analgesia (systemic opioids, conversion to general anesthesia) during surgery for both groups. Secondary outcomes included adverse effects of local anesthetics (hypotension and bradycardia) during surgery and morbidity related to spinal anesthesia (postoperative nausea, vomiting, and bleeding) during hospital stay.
MAIN RESULTS: One hundred fifty patients who received intrathecal levobupivacaine 0.5% (group L) were compared with 90 patients given hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% with fentanyl 25 μg (group B). The mean volume of levobupivacaine administered was 5.8 mL (range, 5.0-6.0 mL), and that of bupivacaine was 3.8 mL (range, 3.5-4.0 mL). Both groups achieved similar maximal sensory level of block (T6). The time to maximal height of sensory block was significantly shorter in group B than group L, 18.2 ± 4.5 vs 23.9 ± 3.8 minutes (P< .001). The time to motor block of Bromage 3 was also shorter in group B (8.7 ± 4.1 minutes) than group L (16.0 ± 4.5 minutes) (P< .001). Patients in group B required more anesthetic supplement than group L (P< .001). Hypotension and postoperative bleeding were significantly less common in group L than group B.
CONCLUSION: Levobupivacaine at a higher dosage provided longer duration of spinal anesthesia with better safety profile in sequential bilateral TKA.
METHODS: Both patients had features of difficult airway, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status class III and central venous occlusive disease. The common approach, i.e., ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block was technically difficult with inherent risk of vascular puncture due to dilated venous collaterals at the supraclavicular area possibly compromising block quality. The risk of general anesthesia (GA) was significant as patients were morbidly obese with possible risk of obstructive sleep apnea postoperatively. As an alternative, we performed the ultrasound-guided costoclavicular approach infraclavicular brachial plexus block with 20 mL local anesthetic (LA) ropivacaine 0.5% delivered at the identified costoclavicular space using in-plane needling technique. Another 10 mL of LA was infiltrated along the subcutaneous fascia of the proximal medial aspect of arm.
RESULTS: Both surgeries of >2 hours' duration were successful, without the need of further local infiltration at surgical site or conversion to GA.
CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided costoclavicular approach can be an alternative way of providing effective analgesia and safe anesthesia for vascular access surgery of the upper limb.