Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although different techniques have been developed for administering combined spinal epidural (CSE) anaesthesia, none can be described as an ideal one. OBJECTIVES: WE PERFORMED A STUDY TO COMPARE TWO POPULAR CSE TECHNIQUES: Double segment technique (DST) and single segment (needle through needle) technique (SST) with another alternative technique: Paramedian epidural and midline spinal in the same intervertebral space (single space dual needle technique: SDT). METHODS: After institutional ethical clearance, 90 consenting patients undergoing elective lower limb orthopaedic surgery were allocated to receive CSE into one of the three groups (n=30 each): Group I: SST, Group II: SDT, Group III: DST using computerized randomization. The time for technique performance, surgical readiness, technical aspects of epidural and subarachnoid block (SAB) and morbidity were compared. RESULTS: SDT is comparable with SST and DST in time for technique performance (13.42±2.848 min, 12.18±6.092 min, 11.63±3.243 min respectively; P=0.268), time to surgical readiness (18.28±3.624 min, 17.64±5.877 min, 16.87±3.137 min respectively; P=0.42) and incidence of technically perfect block (70%, 66.66%, 76.66%; respectively P=0.757). Use of paramedian route for epidural catheterization in SDT group decreases complications and facilitates catheter insertion. There was a significant number of cases with lack of dural puncture appreciation (SST=ten, none in SDT and DST; P=0.001) and delayed cerebrospinal fluid reflux (SST=five, none in SDT and DST; P=0.005) while performance of SAB in SST group. The incidence of nausea, vomiting, post-operative backache and headache was comparable between the three groups. CONCLUSION: SDT is an acceptable alternative to DST and SST.