scholarly journals Spinal subdural hematoma and subdural anesthesia following combined spinal–epidural anesthesia: a case report

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanmei Bi ◽  
Junying Zhou

Abstract Background Subdural anesthesia and spinal subdural hematoma are rare complications of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. We present a patient who developed both after multiple attempts to achieve combined spinal–epidural anesthesia. Case presentation A 21-year-old parturient, gravida 1, para 1, with twin pregnancy at gestational age 34+ 5 weeks underwent cesarean delivery. Routine combined spinal–epidural anesthesia was planned; however, no cerebrospinal fluid outflow was achieved after several attempts. Bupivacaine (2.5 mL) administered via a spinal needle only achieved asymmetric blockade of the lower extremities, reaching T12. Then, epidural administration of low-dose 2-chlorprocaine caused unexpected blockade above T2 as well as tinnitus, dyspnea, and inability to speak. The patient was intubated, and the twins were delivered. Ten minutes after the operation, the patient was awake with normal tidal volume. The endotracheal tube was removed, and she was transferred to the intensive care unit for further observation. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging suggested a spinal subdural hematoma extending from T12 to the cauda equina. Sensory and motor function completely recovered 5 h after surgery. She denied headache, low back pain, or other neurologic deficit. The patient was discharged 6 days after surgery. One month later, repeat MRI was normal. Conclusions All anesthesiologists should be aware of the possibility of SSDH and subdural block when performing neuraxial anesthesia, especially in patients in whom puncture is difficult. Less traumatic methods of achieving anesthesia, such as epidural anesthesia, single-shot spinal anesthesia, or general anesthesia should be considered in these patients. Furthermore, vital signs and neurologic function should be closely monitored during and after surgery.

2004 ◽  
Vol 100 (2) ◽  
pp. 381-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Nur Kaya ◽  
Sukran Sahin ◽  
Medge D. Owen ◽  
James C. Eisenach

Background Intrathecal neostigmine produces analgesia but also nausea, limiting its utility. In contrast, epidural administration of neostigmine has been suggested to produce postoperative analgesia without nausea in nonpregnant patients. The purpose of this study was to examine the dose range for efficacy and side effects of epidural neostigmine in women at cesarean delivery receiving combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. Methods After institutional approval and informed consent, 80 patients for elective cesarean delivery were given combined spinal-epidural anesthesia with 8 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine plus 10 microg fentanyl. Patients were randomized to receive either saline or 75, 150, or 300 microg neostigmine (n = 20 per group) in 10 ml saline after cord clamping. Pain, morphine consumption, and side effects were monitored for 24 h. Results Global pain assessment for the first 24 h was reduced from 5.4 +/- 0.2 in the saline group to 3.0-3.5 +/- 0.3 in the neostigmine groups, dose independently. Correspondingly, global satisfaction with neostigmine was also improved (P < 0.05). Nausea and morphine consumption were similar among groups. Intraoperative shivering and sedation were increased in the 300-microg neostigmine group only (P < 0.05), and postoperative sedation was increased by neostigmine in a dose-independent fashion (P < 0.05). Conclusions Epidural neostigmine produced modest analgesia in women after cesarean delivery. In contrast with previous reports, which focused primarily on nausea, these data suggest that epidural neostigmine can also produce mild sedation for several hours. These data suggest a limited role for single bolus-administration epidural neostigmine for analgesia after cesarean delivery. They also support future study of epidural neostigmine for obstetric analgesia.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-hao Bu ◽  
Wei Wu ◽  
Na Li ◽  
Lin Chen ◽  
Lin-li Yue

Abstract Objective: To explore the optimal anesthetic method of transferring to emergency cesarean section after the failure of labor analgesia. Methods: A retrospective study included 1154 patients who underwent cesarean section in Hubei Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2019 to January 2020, of which 586 patients were transferred to cesarean section after labor analgesia, They were divided into two groups according to the method of anesthesia: Epidural labor analgesia / Epidural anesthesia (ELA/EA) group : After the failure of natural labor during labor analgesia, local anesthetics continue to be added to the epidural(n=282);Epidural labor analgesia/Combined spinal and epidural anesthesia(ELA/CSEA) group: Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia was performed after spontaneous labor failure during epidural labor analgesia(n=304); Combined spinal and epidural anesthesia(CSEA) group: Patients who undergo emergency cesarean section without labor analgesia(n=568). The case data were reviewed and the anesthetic methods, basic vital signs, medication, time, maternal and infant outcome of the three groups were descriptively analyzed. Results: There was a difference in the time of admission to neonatal delivery, the maximum decrease of diastolic blood pressure and the difference of neonatal 1min apgar score between ELA/EA group and ELA/CSEA group. There was a difference in the dosage of spinal anesthesia between ELA/CSEA group and CSEA group. Conclusion: When the obstetrician anesthesiologist fails during labor analgesia and needs to be transferred to cesarean section, they can choose to re-perform combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, which is beneficial to the early outcome of newborns, but the long-term effect on newborns needs to be further studied.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document