Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 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 Ranasinghe, J. S.
Right arrow Articles by Lai, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ranasinghe, J. S.
Right arrow Articles by Lai, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2003, Vol. 91, No. 2 299-300
© 2003 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Correspondence

Combined spinal epidural anaesthesia is better than spinal or epidural alone for Caesarean delivery

J. S. Ranasinghe, J. Steadman, T. Toyama and M. Lai

Miami, USA

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Editor—General anaesthesia for Caesarean delivery is associated with substantially greater maternal risk than regional anaesthesia.1 Most of the deaths occurring during general anaesthesia are airway or aspiration related. Spinal and epidural anaesthesia have therefore become more widely utilized in surgical obstetric practice. Spinal anaesthesia is simple to institute, rapid in its effect and produces excellent operating conditions. Continuous epidural analgesia is more titratable, may produce less haemodynamic swings, and can be topped up if surgery is prolonged or postoperative pain relief is required. Both techniques have a failure rate of 2–5% even with experienced practitioners.

. . . [Full Text of this Article]


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
J. S. Lee, J. S. Ranasinghe, and J. Steadman
Combined spinal epidural anaesthesia is better than spinal or epidural alone
Br. J. Anaesth., February 1, 2004; 92(2): 295 - 296.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
C. L. Chiu, C. Y. Wang, M. R. Stacey, R. Sivasankar, U. B. Bahlmann, R. C. Hughes, and J. E. Hall
Successful use of the airway management device
Br. J. Anaesth., February 1, 2004; 92(2): 297 - 297.
[Full Text] [PDF]