Comparison of selective spinal anesthesia and local infiltration anesthesia under monitored anesthesia care techniques in patients undergoing anorectal day surgery Günübi̇rli̇k anorektal cerrahi̇ olgularinda selekti̇f spi̇nal anestezi̇ i̇le moni̇tori̇ze anestezi̇ bakimi altinda uygulanan lokal i̇nfiltrasyon anestezi̇si̇ yöntemleri̇ni̇n karşilaştirilmasi


Duman A., Apilioǧullari S., TEKİN A., Bodur S.

Nobel Medicus, vol.7, no.2, pp.61-66, 2011 (SCI-Expanded) identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 7 Issue: 2
  • Publication Date: 2011
  • Journal Name: Nobel Medicus
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.61-66
  • Keywords: Anorectal surgery, Monitorized anesthesia care, Selective spinal anesthesia
  • Kütahya Health Sciences University Affiliated: No

Abstract

Objective: In this prospective, randomized study, we aimed to compare the two techniques that we employ routinely in our clinic; selective spinal anesthesia (SSA) and local infiltration anesthesia under monitored anesthesia care (MAC) in terms of patient and surgeon satisfaction, time for ambulation (AT), time to be ready for discharge (RD). Material and Method: In group I (n=30), spinal anesthesia was achieved with 2.5 mg 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine in the sitting position. In group II (n=30), 0.25 mg.kg-1 of ketamine followed by 1-2mg.kg-1of propofol were administered intravenously for sedation. Local infiltration anesthesia consisting of 5ml of 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine and 5ml of 2% prilocaine. Patient and surgeon satisfaction, AT, RD and side effects were compared. Results: The mean AT and RD were 38 min and 45 min respectively in group I and, 43 min and 57 min respectively in group II (p<0.05). While the groups were similar in terms of surgeon satisfaction, patient satisfaction was better in group I (p<0.05). Conclusion: When compared to local infiltration anesthesia under MCA, SSA technique provides better patient satisfaction together with shorter AT and RD times.