A randomized double-blind comparison of the double-space technique versus the single-space technique in combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean section
Abstract Background Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSEA) can be performed with either a single-space technique or a double-space technique for cesarean section. We performed a double-blind randomized controlled study to compare the effect of the double-space technique with that of the single-s...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2020-01-01
|
| Series: | BMC Anesthesiology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-020-0948-7 |
| _version_ | 1818329504022528000 |
|---|---|
| author | Eun Hee Chun Sooyoung Cho Jae Hee Woo Youn Jin Kim |
| author_facet | Eun Hee Chun Sooyoung Cho Jae Hee Woo Youn Jin Kim |
| author_sort | Eun Hee Chun |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSEA) can be performed with either a single-space technique or a double-space technique for cesarean section. We performed a double-blind randomized controlled study to compare the effect of the double-space technique with that of the single-space technique on sensory block level and side effects. Methods Parturients undergoing elective cesarean section under regional anesthesia were randomized to receive CSEA with either the double-space technique (double group, n = 20) or the single-space technique (single group, n = 20). In the double group, an epidural catheter was inserted at the L1–2 interspace, and dural puncture was performed at the L3–4 interspace. In the single group, the procedure was performed at the L3–4 interspace using the needle-through-needle technique. Results There were no differences in time to readiness or intraoperative level of sensory block between the two groups. The postoperative sensory level was maintained at a higher level in the double group than in the single group (1 h postoperatively, P = 0.029; 6 h postoperatively, P = 0.016). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of side effects. The parturient satisfaction scores 48 h postoperatively were significantly different between groups (9.5 in the double group vs. 8 in the single group, P = 0.004). Conclusions We conclude that there were no differences in intraoperative variables between the double-space technique and the single-space technique for CSEA. However, double-space CSEA for cesarean section may be beneficial for controlling postoperative pain and improving parturient satisfaction. Trial registration The study was retrospectively registered at https://cris.nih.go.kr under the trial ID KCT0002514. Date of registration: October 27, 2017. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-13T12:49:06Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b530a8c0df92451e94fe63ce5a2a9e6e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1471-2253 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-13T12:49:06Z |
| publishDate | 2020-01-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Anesthesiology |
| spelling | doaj.art-b530a8c0df92451e94fe63ce5a2a9e6e2022-12-21T23:45:24ZengBMCBMC Anesthesiology1471-22532020-01-012011810.1186/s12871-020-0948-7A randomized double-blind comparison of the double-space technique versus the single-space technique in combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean sectionEun Hee Chun0Sooyoung Cho1Jae Hee Woo2Youn Jin Kim3Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of MedicineDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans UniversityDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans UniversityDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans UniversityAbstract Background Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSEA) can be performed with either a single-space technique or a double-space technique for cesarean section. We performed a double-blind randomized controlled study to compare the effect of the double-space technique with that of the single-space technique on sensory block level and side effects. Methods Parturients undergoing elective cesarean section under regional anesthesia were randomized to receive CSEA with either the double-space technique (double group, n = 20) or the single-space technique (single group, n = 20). In the double group, an epidural catheter was inserted at the L1–2 interspace, and dural puncture was performed at the L3–4 interspace. In the single group, the procedure was performed at the L3–4 interspace using the needle-through-needle technique. Results There were no differences in time to readiness or intraoperative level of sensory block between the two groups. The postoperative sensory level was maintained at a higher level in the double group than in the single group (1 h postoperatively, P = 0.029; 6 h postoperatively, P = 0.016). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of side effects. The parturient satisfaction scores 48 h postoperatively were significantly different between groups (9.5 in the double group vs. 8 in the single group, P = 0.004). Conclusions We conclude that there were no differences in intraoperative variables between the double-space technique and the single-space technique for CSEA. However, double-space CSEA for cesarean section may be beneficial for controlling postoperative pain and improving parturient satisfaction. Trial registration The study was retrospectively registered at https://cris.nih.go.kr under the trial ID KCT0002514. Date of registration: October 27, 2017.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-020-0948-7Cesarean sectionCombined spinal-epidural techniqueObstetric anesthesiaPatient satisfactionRegional anesthesia |
| spellingShingle | Eun Hee Chun Sooyoung Cho Jae Hee Woo Youn Jin Kim A randomized double-blind comparison of the double-space technique versus the single-space technique in combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean section BMC Anesthesiology Cesarean section Combined spinal-epidural technique Obstetric anesthesia Patient satisfaction Regional anesthesia |
| title | A randomized double-blind comparison of the double-space technique versus the single-space technique in combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean section |
| title_full | A randomized double-blind comparison of the double-space technique versus the single-space technique in combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean section |
| title_fullStr | A randomized double-blind comparison of the double-space technique versus the single-space technique in combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean section |
| title_full_unstemmed | A randomized double-blind comparison of the double-space technique versus the single-space technique in combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean section |
| title_short | A randomized double-blind comparison of the double-space technique versus the single-space technique in combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean section |
| title_sort | randomized double blind comparison of the double space technique versus the single space technique in combined spinal epidural anesthesia for cesarean section |
| topic | Cesarean section Combined spinal-epidural technique Obstetric anesthesia Patient satisfaction Regional anesthesia |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-020-0948-7 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT eunheechun arandomizeddoubleblindcomparisonofthedoublespacetechniqueversusthesinglespacetechniqueincombinedspinalepiduralanesthesiaforcesareansection AT sooyoungcho arandomizeddoubleblindcomparisonofthedoublespacetechniqueversusthesinglespacetechniqueincombinedspinalepiduralanesthesiaforcesareansection AT jaeheewoo arandomizeddoubleblindcomparisonofthedoublespacetechniqueversusthesinglespacetechniqueincombinedspinalepiduralanesthesiaforcesareansection AT younjinkim arandomizeddoubleblindcomparisonofthedoublespacetechniqueversusthesinglespacetechniqueincombinedspinalepiduralanesthesiaforcesareansection AT eunheechun randomizeddoubleblindcomparisonofthedoublespacetechniqueversusthesinglespacetechniqueincombinedspinalepiduralanesthesiaforcesareansection AT sooyoungcho randomizeddoubleblindcomparisonofthedoublespacetechniqueversusthesinglespacetechniqueincombinedspinalepiduralanesthesiaforcesareansection AT jaeheewoo randomizeddoubleblindcomparisonofthedoublespacetechniqueversusthesinglespacetechniqueincombinedspinalepiduralanesthesiaforcesareansection AT younjinkim randomizeddoubleblindcomparisonofthedoublespacetechniqueversusthesinglespacetechniqueincombinedspinalepiduralanesthesiaforcesareansection |