title: Combined spinal epidural and epidural volume extension: Interaction of patient position and hyperbaric bupivacaine.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Previous trials have documented failure of block augmentation with epidural volume extension, when applied after the intrathecal injection of hyperbaric bupivacaine was made in sitting position. However, there is no study comparing the effect of change in patient position during block performance, on the results of epidural volume extension.
  
  
  METHODS
  The study was conducted in two parts in American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II parturients scheduled for elective cesarean section under regional anesthesia. In the first part, 28 patients were randomized to one of the two groups, depending on whether epidural volume extension was applied following the block in sitting (group SE) or lateral position (group LE) (n=14 each). In the second part of the study another 28 patients were recruited and randomized to receive the block in sitting (group S) or lateral (group L) position (n=14 each), without epidural volume extension. All patients received combined spinal epidural block using needle-through-needle technique with intrathecal injection of 9 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine (0.5%) and 10 μg fentanyl. Epidural volume extension was performed using 5 ml normal saline in groups SE and LE.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In the first part of the study, the maximum sensory block level was higher in group LE vs. SE (P<0.05). In the second part of the study, no significant difference was seen in the maximum sensory level between group S and group L (P>0.05).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  If epidural volume extension is being applied with intention of rapid extension of sensory block when hyperbaric bupivacaine has been injected intrathecally, the combined spinal epidural block should be performed in lateral position rather than in the sitting position.
authors.affiliation: Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Shahadra, Department of Anaesthesiology, Max Hospital, Delhi, India.
authors.forename: Asha
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Tyagi
authors.forename: Anil
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Kumar
authors.forename: Gautam
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Girotra
authors.forename: Ashok Kumar
authors.initials: AK
authors.lastname: Sethi
references.citation: Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1998 Jan-Feb;23(1):92-5
references.pmid: 9552785
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2008 Jul;107(1):333-8
references.pmid: 18635505
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 1999 Apr;88(4):810-4
references.pmid: 10195529
references.citation: Int J Obstet Anesth. 2002 Jul;11(3):190-5
references.pmid: 15321547
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 1997 Nov;85(5):1097-100
references.pmid: 9356106
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2005 Apr;100(4):1159-1165
references.pmid: 15781538
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 2006 Jan;102(1):243-7
references.pmid: 16368837
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 1993 Nov;77(5):919-24
references.pmid: 8214727
references.citation: Anesth Analg. 1998 Sep;87(3):614-8
references.pmid: 9728840
references.citation: Int J Obstet Anesth. 2007 Oct;16(4):346-53
references.pmid: 17693082
references.citation: Br J Anaesth. 1992 Nov;69(5):457-60
references.pmid: 1467075
references.citation: Can J Anaesth. 1993 Oct;40(10):943-6
references.pmid: 8222034
references.citation: Br J Anaesth. 2004 Oct;93(4):568-78
references.pmid: 15220175
references.citation: Int J Obstet Anesth. 2009 Jul;18(3):231-6
references.pmid: 19447598
references.citation: Anaesthesia. 1995 Apr;50(4):363-5
references.pmid: 7747861
references.citation: Anaesthesia. 2005 Jun;60(6):535-40
references.pmid: 15918823