Which administration route of fentanyl better enhances the spread of spinal anaesthesia: intravenous, intrathecal or both?

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorKararmaz, A
dc.contributor.authorKaya, S
dc.contributor.authorTurhanoglu, S
dc.contributor.authorOzyilmaz, MA
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T16:19:12Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T16:19:12Z
dc.date.issued2003
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: To enhance the spread of spinal anaesthesia, fentanyl may be administered intrathecally (i.t.) or intravenously (i.v.). The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the effects of fentanyl administered i.v., i.t. or concurrently by both i.v. and spinal routes on the spread of spinal anaesthesia. Methods: Sixty patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups. In Groups I and II, spinal anaesthesia was performed with plain bupivacaine 10 mg plus 20 mg fentanyl and in Group III with 10 mg of plain bupivacaine. The level of first peak sensory block was marked. In addition, fentanyl 50 mg was administered i.v. in Groups II and III or by saline in Group I after the sensory blockade reached the highest dermatomal level. Ten minutes after i.v. administration, the level of the second peak sensory block was marked. The distance between the first- and second-highest levels of sensory block was measured. Results: The distance between the first- and second-highest level of sensory block was significantly different for the three groups: Group II ( 5.8 +/- 2.6 cm)> Group III (2.9 +/- 2.1 cm) > Group I ( - 0.15 +/- 1.7 cm). The peak dermatomal level of spinal block was significantly higher in Group II [ T4 ( T3 - T7)] than in Group I [ T6 ( T4 - T9)] and Group III [ T6 ( T4-T8)]. In Groups I and II the sensory block regressed to S2 for a longer period of time than it did in Group III. Conclusion: Both the spinal and systemic administration of fentanyl enhanced the spread of spinal anaesthesia. The co-administration of spinal and i.v. fentanyl produced a greater increase in the cephalad spread of spinal block.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.00231.x
dc.identifier.endpage1100en_US
dc.identifier.issn0001-5172
dc.identifier.issue9en_US
dc.identifier.pmid12969102
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-0043238026
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage1096en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.00231.x
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/16429
dc.identifier.volume47en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000185251000009
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ2
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBlackwell Munksgaarden_US
dc.relation.ispartofActa Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectAnalgesicsen_US
dc.subjectFentanylen_US
dc.subjectLocal Anestheticsen_US
dc.subjectBupivacaineen_US
dc.subjectAnesthetic Techniquesen_US
dc.subjectSpinalen_US
dc.titleWhich administration route of fentanyl better enhances the spread of spinal anaesthesia: intravenous, intrathecal or both?en_US
dc.titleWhich administration route of fentanyl better enhances the spread of spinal anaesthesia: intravenous, intrathecal or both?
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu