Journal of Yeungnam Medical Science

Original Articles

Prophylactic intravenous ephedrine infusion during spinal anesthesia for cesarean section.: Bon Up Koo; Yeungnam Univ J Med. 1991;8(1):72-78. Published online June 30, 1991; DOI: https://doi.org/10.12701/yujm.1991.8.1.72

1,547 View
3 Download

Abstract PDF: Ephedrine sulfate was administrated 30 healthy parturients undergoing elective repeat cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Fifteen patients received ephedrine infusion (0.01% solution, beginning with approximately 5 mg/min) immediately after induction of spinal anesthesia to maintain maternal systolic blood pressure between 90% and 100% of the baseline systolic blood pressure (mean dose of ephedrine 31.6 mg). Fifteen patients (control group) received 20mg of ephedrine as an intravenous bolus, and additional 10mg increments, if necessary, when systolic blood pressure decreased to 80% of the baseline systolic blood pressure (mean dose of ephedrine 26.8 mg). Nausea and/or vomiting occurred in seven women in the control group and on patient in the infusion group (p<0.001). Apgar scores, fetal blood gas tension, and time for onset of respiration was comparable in the two groups. The results suggest that prophylactic ephedrine infusion is safe and desirable in healthy parturients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia.

Spinal Anesthesia for Lower Extremities : Comparison of Plain 0.5% Bupivacaine and Hyperbaric 0.5% Tetracaine.: Sun Ok Song, Bon Up Koo; Yeungnam Univ J Med. 1990;7(2):121-130. Published online December 31, 1990; DOI: https://doi.org/10.12701/yujm.1990.7.2.121

1,530 View
3 Download

Abstract PDF: Plain 0.5% bupivacaine and hyperbaric 0.5% tetracaine were compared for spinal anesthesia in 40 patients undergoing operation of lower extremities. Lumbar puncture was performed with a 22 gauge spinal needle with the patient in the lateral recumbent position. The third lumbar interspace was chosen for the puncture, when a free flow of clear CSF was obtained, the local anesthetic solution (2.5 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine or 2.0 ml of hyperbaric 0.5% tetracaine) was injected at a rate of 0.1ml/sec without barbotage. After injection of anesthetics, clinical features were observed and compared between the two groups. The results were as follows: 1. The two groups were well matched for age, sex, height and weight. 2. In both groups, sensory block to T₁₂ dermatome was obtained within 4 minutes, mean maximal level of analgesia was T₆₋₇, and the mean time for maximal level was around 20 minutes. 3. The onset times of motor block were similar in both groups and complete motor block was obtained in all cases within 20 minutes. 4. The duration of analgesia above the T₁₂ dermatome was 3 hours, postoperative analgesia was 7 hours. These value were significantly prolonged than those of the tetracaine group (p<0.05). 5. The changes in systolic pressure in the bupivacaine group were significantly less than those of the tetracaine group (p<0.05). 6. The complications after spinal anesthesia were headache, numbness, urinary retention and backpain, and were no significant difference in both groups. From the obtained results, we concluded that plain 0.5% bupivacaine was a relatively satisfactory agent for spinal anesthesia for operation of lower extremities. The time of onset, height of block and the complications of postoperative period were similar in both groups. The advantages of plain 0.5% bupivacaine were less hypotension and long duration of analgesia.

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search