BACKGROUND: The incidence of TNS after spinal anaesthesia is a problem. Especially the use of hyperbaric lidocaine in patients placed in the lithotomy position during surgery has been associated with a high incidence of TNS. The present study was performed to investigate whether TNS is present more frequently in patients undergoing surgery in the supine position with use ofhyperbaric lidocaine compared with hyperbaric bupivacaine. METHOD:Seventy patients were included and randomised to receive either hyperbaric lidocaine or hyperbaric bupivacaine. All patients were contacted on the first and third postoperative days by an anaesthesiologist blinded to the local anaesthetic used. The patients were asked about symptoms of TNS, pain not associated with the operation area, and asked to grade the complaints after a verbal analogue score from 0 to 10. RESULTS: We found a total of ten patients who showed signs of TNS. There were nine patients in the lidocaine group (26%) who showed signs of TNS compared to only one patient in the bupivacaine group (3%) (P<0.01). The average score of TNS complaints was 3.5. A total of 13 patients (19%) complained of back pain. There were no significant differences with regard to which local anaesthetic was used. The average score of back pain was 3.3. CONCLUSION:TNS is a significant problem in patients having spinal anaesthesia withhyperbaric lidocaine compared to hyperbaric bupivacaine, both in the supine position. For day-case surgery, TNS would start after dismissal from hospital. The use of hyperbaric lidocaine is therefore questionable, even though these problems are of an order that the majority of patients would still choose spinal anaesthesia for future operations.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The incidence of TNS after spinal anaesthesia is a problem. Especially the use of hyperbaric lidocaine in patients placed in the lithotomy position during surgery has been associated with a high incidence of TNS. The present study was performed to investigate whether TNS is present more frequently in patients undergoing surgery in the supine position with use of hyperbaric lidocaine compared with hyperbaric bupivacaine. METHOD: Seventy patients were included and randomised to receive either hyperbaric lidocaine or hyperbaric bupivacaine. All patients were contacted on the first and third postoperative days by an anaesthesiologist blinded to the local anaesthetic used. The patients were asked about symptoms of TNS, pain not associated with the operation area, and asked to grade the complaints after a verbal analogue score from 0 to 10. RESULTS: We found a total of ten patients who showed signs of TNS. There were nine patients in the lidocaine group (26%) who showed signs of TNS compared to only one patient in the bupivacaine group (3%) (P<0.01). The average score of TNS complaints was 3.5. A total of 13 patients (19%) complained of back pain. There were no significant differences with regard to which local anaesthetic was used. The average score of back pain was 3.3. CONCLUSION:TNS is a significant problem in patients having spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric lidocaine compared to hyperbaric bupivacaine, both in the supine position. For day-case surgery, TNS would start after dismissal from hospital. The use of hyperbaric lidocaine is therefore questionable, even though these problems are of an order that the majority of patients would still choose spinal anaesthesia for future operations.
Authors: Daniel K O'Neill; Bryan Robins; Elizabeth A Ayello; Germaine Cuff; Patrick Linton; Harold Brem Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2012-04-20 Impact factor: 3.315