A randomized, double-masked, multicenter comparison of the safety of continuous intrathecal labor analgesia using a 28-gauge catheter versus continuous epidural labor analgesia

Anesthesiology

Volumn 108, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 286-298

  Arkoosh, Valerie A ^a,i   Palmer, Craig M ^b   Yun, Esther M ^c   Sharma, Shiv K ^d   Bates, James N ^e   Wissler, Richard N ^f   Buxbaum, Jodie L ^g   Nogami, Wallace M ^b   Gracely, Edward J ^h  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^c LENOX HILL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY   (United States)

^g PENN STATE COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^h DREXEL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

ⁱ 1105 Penn Tower ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BUPIVACAINE; EPHEDRINE; LIDOCAINE; MORPHINE; NALOXONE; SUFENTANIL;

ADULT; ANALGESIA; ARTICLE; BACKACHE; BRADYCARDIA; CATHETER; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTINUOUS INFUSION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GAIT DISORDER; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMAN; HYPOTENSION; INCIDENCE; LABOR; MULTICENTER STUDY; MUSCLE WEAKNESS; NAUSEA; NEUROLOGIC EXAMINATION; NEUROLOGICAL COMPLICATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTDURAL PUNCTURE HEADACHE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRURITUS; PUERPERIUM; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RESPIRATION DEPRESSION; SENSORY DYSFUNCTION; SIDE EFFECT; TENDON REFLEX; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 38549107487     PISSN: 00033022     EISSN: 15281175     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.anes.0000299429.52105.e5     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Carpenter SL, Ceravolo AJ, Foldes FF: Continuous-drop subarachnoidal block with dilute procaine solution for labor and delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1951; 61:1277-84
2. Benedetti C, Tiengo M: Continuous subarachnoid analgesia in labour. Lancet 1990; 335:225
3. Johnson MD, Hurley RJ, Gilbertson LI, Datta S: Continuous microcatheter spinal anesthesia with subarachnoid meperidine for labor and delivery. Anesth Analg 1990; 70:658-61
4. Huckaby T, Skerman JH, Hurley RJ, Lambert DH: Sensory analgesia for vaginal deliveries: A preliminary report of continuous spinal anesthesia with a 32-gauge catheter. Reg Anesth 1991; 16:150-3
5. Honet JE, Arkoosh VA, Norris MC, Huffnagle HJ, Silverman NS, Leighton BL: Comparison among intrathecal fentanyl, meperidine, and sufentanil for labor analgesia. Anesth Analg 1992; 75:734-9
6. Arkoosh VA: Continuous spinal analgesia and anesthesia in obstetrics. Reg Anesth 1993; 18:402-5
7. Rigler ML, Drasner K, Krejcie TC, Yelich SJ, Scholnick FT, DeFontes J, Bohner D: Cauda equina syndrome after continuous spinal anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1991; 72:275-81
8. US Food and Drug Administration: FDA Safety Alert: Cauda Equina Syndrome Associated with the Use of Small-bore Catheters in Continuous Spinal Anesthesia. May 29, 1992
9. Lambert LA, Lambert DH, Strichartz GR: Irreversible conduction block in isolated nerve by high concentrations of local anesthetics. ANESTHESIOLOGY 1994; 80:1082-93
10. Drasner K, Sakura S, Chan VWS, Bollen AW, Ciriales R: Persistent sacral sensory deficit induced by intrathecal local anesthetic infusion in the rat. ANESTHESIOLOGY 1994; 80:847-52
11. Sakura S, Chan VWS, Ciriales R, Drasner K: The addition of 7.5-percent glucose does not alter the neurotoxicity of 5-percent lidocaine administered intrathecally in the rat. ANESTHESIOLOGY 1995; 82:236-40
12. Lambert DH, Hurley RJ: Cauda equina syndrome and continuous spinal anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1991; 72:817-19
13. Rigler ML, Drasner K: Distribution of catheter-injected local anesthetic in a model of the subarachnoid space. ANESTHESIOLOGY 1991; 75:684-92
14. Robinson RA, Stewart SFC, Myers MR, Lien LF, Rinaldi JR, Swisher JL, Drasner K: In vitro modeling of spinal anesthesia. A NESTHESIOLOGY 1994; 81:1053-60
15. Ayad S, Demian Y, Narouze SN, Tetzlaff JE: Subarachnoid catheter placement after wet tap for analgesia in labor: Influence on the risk of headache in obstetric patients. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2003; 28:512-5
16. Gravenstein N, Blackshear RH, Wissler R: An approach to spinal or epidural catheters that are difficult to remove (letter). A NESTHESIOLOGY 1991; 75:544
17. Boey SK, Carrie LES: Withdrawal forces during removal of lumbar epidural catheters. Br J Anaesth 1994; 73:833-5
18. Dawkins CJM: An analysis of the complications of extradural and caudal block. Anaesthesia 1969; 24:554-63
19. Altman DG: Practical Statistics for Medical Research. London, Chapman & Hall, 1999, pp 66-71
20. Hanley JA, Lippman-Hand A: If nothing goes wrong, is everything all right? JAMA 1983; 249:1743-5
21. Rumke CL: Implications of the statement: No side effects were observed. N Engl J Med 1975; 292:372-3
22. Hollmen A, Jouppila R, Pihlajaniemi R, Karvonen P, Sjostedt E: Selective lumbar epidural block in labour: A clinical analysis. Acta Anaesth Scand 1977; 21:174-81
23. Crawford JS: The second thousand epidural blocks in an obstetric hospital practice. Br J Anaesth 1972; 44:1277-87
24. Sutter PA, Gamulin Z, Forster A: Comparison of continuous spinal and continuous epidural anaesthesia for lower limb surgery in elderly patients: A retrospective study. Anaesthesia 1989; 44:47-50
25. Whittaker S: Continuous spinal analgesia/anaesthesia in obstetrics. Int J Obstet Anes 2007; 16:183
26. Imbelloni LE, Gouveia MA: Continuous spinal anesthesia with Spinocath® for obstetric analgesia (letter). Int J Obstet Anesth 2006; 15:171-2
27. Gosch UW, Hueppe M, Hallschmid M, Born J, Schmucker P, Meier T: Post-dural puncture headache in young adults: Comparison of two small-gauge spinal catheters with different needle design. Br J Anaesth 2005; 94:657-61
28. Swenson JD, Owen J, Lamoreaux W, Viscomi C, McJames S, Cluff M: The effect of distance from injection site to the brainstem using spinal sufentanil. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2001; 26:306-9
29. Ferouz F, Norris MC, Leighton BL: Risk of respiratory arrest after intrathecal sufentanil. Anesth Analg 1997; 85:1088-90
30. Deusch E, Benrath J, Weigl L, Neumann K, Kozek-Langenecker SA: The mechanical properties of continuous spinal small-bore catheters. Anesth Analg 2004; 99:1844-7