Thoracic extradural (epidural) block for upper abdominal surgery

Dawkins, Claire; Steel, G. C.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2044.1971.tb04713.x

Cited by 28 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During recent years thoracic epidural analgesia for postoperative pain relief has been subject to an increasing interest. From a clinical and physiological view excellent resultsin comparison with conventional morphine analgesiahave been reported by SIMPSON et al (1961), GREEN & DAWKINS (1966), MUNEYUKI et al (1968), SPOEREL et al (1970), SPENCE et al (1968), SPENCE & SMITH (1971), DAWKINS & STEEL (1971), HOLMDAHL et al (1972), H O L L M~N & SAUKKONEN (1972) and BRANDT & KVISSELGAARD (1 972).…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Thoracic Epidural Analgesia —II: Prolongation in the Early Postoperative Period by Continuous Injection of 1.0% Bupivacaine

Renck¹,

Edström²,

Kinnberger³

et al. 1976

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sixteen patients were given thoracic epidural analgesia at the T5-T6 level with 2 ml of 1.0% bupivacaine solution plain for pain relief after upper abdominal surgery. In 13 cases the analgesia was prolonged by continuous injection of 1.0% bupivacaine for 24 or 48 h. Onset time and segmental spread of the analgesia are presented as well as segmental spread, intensity of the blockade, and peak expiratory flow rates during prolongation. Signs of tachyphylaxis were noticed, and also signs of accumulation of bupivacaine in plasma. A high incidence of urinary retention occurred. The method is not considered to be ideal for pain relief after upper abdominal surgery.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Thoracic Epidural Analgesia —II: Prolongation in the Early Postoperative Period by Continuous Injection of 1.0% Bupivacaine

Renck¹,

Edström²,

Kinnberger³

et al. 1976

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If both techniques are performed above the lower border of L2, both are associated with the risk of spinal cord trauma; although the angle involved in the lateral approach above T9 allows a greater penetration of the epidural space before the dura or spinal cord may be pierced. 10 When epidural analgesia is contemplated the suitability of the patient is first evaluated. The technique is not used if the patient has preexisting neurologic disease, fractured vertebra, a coagulation disorder, infection overlying the area of insertion, or if the patient is unconscious, uncooperative, or refuses to be treated by this technique.…”

Section: Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%