Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Reading: Spinal anaesthesia for single level spine surgery: comparison between bupivacaine with fenta...

Download

A- A+
Alt. Display

Research article

Spinal anaesthesia for single level spine surgery: comparison between bupivacaine with fentanyl and bupivacaine with clonidine

Authors:

R. Madhava Reddy ,

Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences, Bangalore, Karnataka, IN
About R. Madhava
Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology
X close

Nandini D. Prasad,

Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences, Bangalore, Karnataka, IN
About Nandini D.
Resident, Department of Anaesthesiology
X close

Rashmi S. Shankar

Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences, Bangalore, Karnataka, IN
About Rashmi S.
Resident, Department of Anaesthesiology
X close

Abstract

Background:

Spinal anaesthesia is safe and effective for lumbar spine surgeries. Adequate analgesia and patient’s comfort are to be taken care of in prone position. So, we compared fentanyl and clonidine added to bupivacaine in patients undergoing single level spine surgery under spinal anaesthesia.

 

Materials and methods:

Sixty patients aged 18 and 50 years of either sex were randomly allocated into two groups. Group F received 50μg of fentanyl and group C received 50μg of clonidine as adjuvants to 3ml of 0.5% bupivacaine. Duration of analgesia, sedation and patient’s comfort were assessed.

 

Results:

Duration of analgesia was 193.5±15.6 and 440.7±31.9 minutes in group F and group C respectively. All patients in group C were comfortable in prone position. 4 patients in fentanyl group received propofol infusion.

 

Conclusion:

Intrathecal fentanyl and clonidine are safe and effective adjuvants to bupivacaine in prone position whereas clonidine is better in providing intraoperative patient’s comfort and postoperative analgesia.
How to Cite: Reddy, R.M., Prasad, N.D. and Shankar, R.S., 2019. Spinal anaesthesia for single level spine surgery: comparison between bupivacaine with fentanyl and bupivacaine with clonidine. Sri Lankan Journal of Anaesthesiology, 27(1), pp.47–52. DOI: http://doi.org/10.4038/slja.v27i1.8391
Published on 06 Feb 2019.
Peer Reviewed

Downloads

  • PDF (EN)

    comments powered by Disqus