BACKGROUND: Although there is a considerable difference in the number of clinical reports of neurologic injury between spinal anesthesia and other regional techniques, there are no animal data concerning a difference in the local anesthetic neurotoxicity between intrathecal and epidural administration. In the current study, the functional and morphologic effects of lidocaine administered intrathecally and epidurally were compared in rats. METHODS: Male rats were implanted with an intrathecal or epidural catheter through L4-L5 vertebra in the caudal direction. In experiment 1, to determine relative anesthetic potency, 16 rats received repetitive injections of 2.5% lidocaine into intrathecal or epidural space in different volumes and were examined for tail flick test for 90 min. In experiment 2, to ascertain whether the relative potency obtained in experiment 1 would apply to other concentrations of lidocaine, additional rats received saline, 1%, 2.5%, or 5% lidocaine in a volume of 20 or 100 microl through the intrathecal or epidural catheter, respectively. In experiment 3, additional rats that received saline, 2.5% lidocaine, or 10% lidocaine in a volume of 20 or 100 microl through the intrathecal or epidural catheter, respectively, were examined for persistent functional impairment and morphologic damage. RESULTS: In experiment 1, the two techniques produced parallel dose-effect curves that significantly differed from each other. The potency ratio calculated was approximately 4.72 (3.65-6.07):1 for intrathecal:epidural lidocaine. In experiment 2, every lidocaine solution produced a similar increase in tail flick latency for the two techniques. In experiment 3, five of eight rats given 10% intrathecal lidocaine incurred functional impairment 4 days after injection, whereas no rats in the other groups did. Significantly more morphologic damage was observed in rats given 10% intrathecal lidocaine than in those given 10% epidural lidocaine. CONCLUSIONS: Persistent functional impairment occurred only after intrathecal lidocaine. Histologic damage in the nerve roots and the spinal cord was less severe after epidural lidocaine than after intrathecal lidocaine. The current results substantiate the clinical impression that neurologic complications are less frequent after epidural anesthesia than after spinal anesthesia.
BACKGROUND: Although there is a considerable difference in the number of clinical reports of neurologic injury between spinal anesthesia and other regional techniques, there are no animal data concerning a difference in the local anesthetic neurotoxicity between intrathecal and epidural administration. In the current study, the functional and morphologic effects of lidocaine administered intrathecally and epidurally were compared in rats. METHODS: Male rats were implanted with an intrathecal or epidural catheter through L4-L5 vertebra in the caudal direction. In experiment 1, to determine relative anesthetic potency, 16 rats received repetitive injections of 2.5% lidocaine into intrathecal or epidural space in different volumes and were examined for tail flick test for 90 min. In experiment 2, to ascertain whether the relative potency obtained in experiment 1 would apply to other concentrations of lidocaine, additional rats received saline, 1%, 2.5%, or 5% lidocaine in a volume of 20 or 100 microl through the intrathecal or epidural catheter, respectively. In experiment 3, additional rats that received saline, 2.5% lidocaine, or 10% lidocaine in a volume of 20 or 100 microl through the intrathecal or epidural catheter, respectively, were examined for persistent functional impairment and morphologic damage. RESULTS: In experiment 1, the two techniques produced parallel dose-effect curves that significantly differed from each other. The potency ratio calculated was approximately 4.72 (3.65-6.07):1 for intrathecal:epidural lidocaine. In experiment 2, every lidocaine solution produced a similar increase in tail flick latency for the two techniques. In experiment 3, five of eight rats given 10% intrathecal lidocaine incurred functional impairment 4 days after injection, whereas no rats in the other groups did. Significantly more morphologic damage was observed in rats given 10% intrathecal lidocaine than in those given 10% epidural lidocaine. CONCLUSIONS: Persistent functional impairment occurred only after intrathecal lidocaine. Histologic damage in the nerve roots and the spinal cord was less severe after epidural lidocaine than after intrathecal lidocaine. The current results substantiate the clinical impression that neurologic complications are less frequent after epidural anesthesia than after spinal anesthesia.
Authors: Barak Yahalom; Umeshkumar Athiraman; Sulpicio G Soriano; David Zurakowski; Elizabeth A Carpino; Gabriel Corfas; Charles B Berde Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Emre Hamurtekin; Bethany L Fitzsimmons; Veronica I Shubayev; Marjorie R Grafe; Ronald Deumens; Tony L Yaksh; Suellen M Walker Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 7.892