Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 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 (14)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by EDWARDS, N. D.
Right arrow Articles by REILLY, C. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by EDWARDS, N. D.
Right arrow Articles by REILLY, C. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 1995, Vol. 74, No. 4 368-372
© 1995 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

research-article

Perioperative myocardial ischaemia in patients undergoing transurethral surgery: a pilot study comparing general with spinal anaesthesia

N. D. EDWARDS, MB, BS, FRCA, L. C. CALLAGHAN, BMEDSCI, T. WHITE, BMEDSCI and C. S. REILLY, MD, FRCA

University Department of Surgical and Anaesthetic Sciences, Royal Hallamshire Hospital Glossop Road, Sheffield S10 2JF

We have studied the incidence and duration of perioperative myocardial ischaemia using ambulatory ECG monitoring in 100 patients undergoing transurethral surgery, who were allocated randomly to receive either general or spinal anaesthesia. The overall incidence of myocardial ischaemia increased from 18% to 26% between the preoperative and postoperative periods. Patients with ischaemic heart disease had a significantly greater incidence of myocardial ischaemia after operation than patients without known ischaemic heart disease (P < 0.05). There was an increase in both the incidence and duration of myocardial ischaemia after operation with both anaesthetic techniques, but no significant difference between the two.


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
 Contin Educ Anaesth Crit Care PainHome page
A. M. O'Donnell and I. T.H. Foo
Anaesthesia for transurethral resection of the prostate
CEACCP, June 1, 2009; 9(3): 92 - 96.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
D. J. Cook and G. A. Rooke
Priorities in Perioperative Geriatrics
Anesth. Analg., June 1, 2003; 96(6): 1823 - 1836.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
F. Jin and F. Chung
Minimizing perioperative adverse events in the elderly{dagger}
Br. J. Anaesth., October 1, 2001; 87(4): 608 - 624.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
A. Rodgers, N. Walker, S Schug, A McKee, H Kehlet, A van Zundert, D Sage, M Futter, G Saville, T Clark, et al.
Reduction of postoperative mortality and morbidity with epidural or spinal anaesthesia: results from overview of randomised trials
BMJ, December 16, 2000; 321(7275): 1493 - 1493.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


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.