Skip Navigation


BJA Advance Access originally published online on August 5, 2006
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2006 97(5):704-709; doi:10.1093/bja/ael222
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
97/5/704    most recent
ael222v1
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kallio, H.
Right arrow Articles by Rosenberg, P. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kallio, H.
Right arrow Articles by Rosenberg, P. H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2006. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Hyperbaric articaine for day-case spinal anaesthesia

H. Kallio1,2,*, E.-V. T. Snäll2, T. Luode2 and P. H. Rosenberg1

1 Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Helsinki University Central Hospital Helsinki, Finland
2 Department of Anaesthesia, Forssa Hospital Forssa, Finland

*Corresponding author: Department of Anaesthesia, Eye Hospital, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Haartmanstreet 4, PO 220, 00029 HUS, Finland. E-mail: helena.kallio{at}hus.fi

Background. Articaine and lidocaine are clinically very similar suggesting that articaine could be suitable for day-case spinal anaesthesia. A dose–response study with articaine in ambulatory spinal anaesthesia was therefore performed.

Methods. In this randomized double-blind study, 90 day-case surgery patients received spinal anaesthesia with 60 mg (A60), 84 mg (A84) or 108 mg (A108) of hyperbaric articaine hydrochloride. Sensory block was tested with pinprick and motor block on a modified Bromage scale. A structured interview was performed on the first and seventh postoperative days.

Results. Sensory block reached the T10 dermatome in a median (range) of 5 (5–10) and was maintained at this level for 70 (35–145), 70 (15–115) and 85 (20–115) min in the A60, A84 and A108 groups, respectively. Six patients in the A108 group, two in the A84 group and one in the A60 group had maximum spread of analgesia to T1 or higher (NS). Patients in the A108 group needed more medication for hypotension (P=0.018), had more often nausea and vomiting (P=0.027), took oral fluids later (P=0.031) and both sensory block recovery [median (range)] [2.5 (2–4.5) h] (P=0.017) and motor block recovery [2 (1.3–4) h] (P=0.009) were delayed. No patients in the A108 group needed opioid intraoperatively while fentanyl was needed in 5 (17%) and 2 (7%) patients in the A60 and A84 groups, respectively. Discharge criteria were attained in approximately 4.5 h after articaine injection (NS) and no drug-related sequelae were observed.

Conclusions. Hyperbaric articaine 60 and 84 mg resulted in spinal anaesthesia allowing surgery of the lower extremities for about 1 h. Recovery was rapid. Use of 108 mg of articaine is not recommended because of frequent extensive cephalad spread of the block, accompanied by arterial hypotension and nausea.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br J AnaesthHome page
M. P. Hendriks, C. J. M. de Weert, M. M. J. Snoeck, H. P. Hu, M. A. L. Pluim, and M. J. M. Gielen
Plain articaine or prilocaine for spinal anaesthesia in day-case knee arthroscopy: a double-blind randomized trial
Br. J. Anaesth., February 1, 2009; 102(2): 259 - 263.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br J AnaesthHome page
M. Bachmann, P. Pere, P. Kairaluoma, P. H. Rosenberg, and H. Kallio
Comparison of hyperbaric and plain articaine in spinal anaesthesia for open inguinal hernia repair
Br. J. Anaesth., December 1, 2008; 101(6): 848 - 854.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br J AnaesthHome page
T. Dijkstra, J. A. Reesink, B. C. Verdouw, W. S. C. J. M. Van der Pol, T. Feberwee, and A. G. Vulto
Spinal anaesthesia with articaine 5% vs bupivacaine 0.5% for day-case lower limb surgery: a double-blind randomized clinical trial
Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2008; 100(1): 104 - 108.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.