![]() |
![]() |
The combined
spinal-epidural (CSE) technique
Epidural
and spinal blocks have a long history of safe use for a variety of surgical
procedures and pain relief. Both techniques are used extensively world-wide.
Nevertheless both techniques have well-recognized drawbacks which are
particularly prominent in obstetric and high-risk patients. For example
it is generally recognized that a S5-T4 block
is necessary for adequate analgesia during caesarean section. Epidural
technique for such an extensive block may be associated with a relatively
high incidence of hypotension and a potential risk of toxic complications
because of requirement of large doses of local anaesthetic drugs. Furthermore,
in spite of these large doses the block may be inadequate in 10 to 25
per cent of patients, mainly because of difficulty in blocking the
sacral roots. Spinal anaesthesia is more reliable than epidural anaesthesia
because of its more intense motor block but the upper level of spinal
block is unpredictable and the technique may be associated with a high
risk of precipitous maternal hypotension which may be harmful for the
neonate. Since spinal block is usually a "single shot" technique
there is no possibility of improving an inadequate block or providing
extended postoperative pain relief.
The
combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique can reduce or eliminate some
of the disadvantages of spinal and epidural anaesthesia while preserving
their advantages. CSE offers the speed of onset, efficacy and minimal
toxicity of a spinal block combined with the possibility of improving
an inadequate block or prolonging the duration of anaesthesia with
epidural supplements and extending the analgesia well into the postoperative
period. For labour pain the CSE technique offers the possibility of
combining almost instantaneous intrathecal opioid analgesia with the
flexibility of epidural analgesia, this approach allows the parturient
to ambulate throughout labour. These advantages are making CSE blocks
increasingly popular especially in obstetrics and for orthopaedic surgery
(1-3).
CSE
for labour analgesia One
disadvantage of the epidural technique for labour analgesia is the length
of time before it becomes established. This problem may be particularly
important in women who experience severe pain (e.g., the strongly labouring
multipara and in oxytocin-augmented labour). The difficulty in predicting
the duration of first stage and occasional late request for epidural
analgesia may result in delivery before the requested epidural block
has become established. Injecting local anaesthetics or opioids, or
their combination intrathecally will provide rapid-onset analgesia.
The epidural catheter is then used if labour continues beyond the duration
of the subarachnoid block or to improve analgesia if the subarachnoid
block is inadequate. Intrathecal opioids are being used increasingly
by obstetric anaesthesiologists to provide labour analgesia, with the
most common opioids being sufentanil and fentanyl. Morphine and meperidine
are less popular in the context of labour analgesia. Some obstetricians
claim that epidural analgesia increases the incidence of caesarean delivery
and although the incidence of caesarean deliveries is now, about 20%
in most developed countries with on-site anaesthesia services, cause
and effect are still unproven. However, one of the main limitations
of intrathecal opioids such as sufentanil and fentanyl is the short
duration of analgesic effect, which necessitates additional dural puncture(s).
Therefore, intrathecal opioids would most appropriately be used with
CSE technique. In one study of 300 labouring women receiving a combination
of intrathecal bupivacaine and fentanyl, the CSE technique provided
analgesia, which also allowing most mothers to walk throughout labour.
While it is unclear if ambulation in labour reduces its duration, meta-analysis
of studies of labouring parturients suggest that analgesic requirements
are reduced by ambulation, and that women appreciate the opportunity
to ambulate even for short periods during labour.
A
recent controlled study has demonstrated that the duration of bupivacaine-sufentanil
for ambulating CSE labour analgesia can be prolonged from 100 to 140
min by the addition of 25 µg epinephrine (4).
Other
indications for CSE technique A
review of the literature shows that CSE has been used in general surgery,
orthopaedic and trauma surgery of the lower limb, urological and gynecological
surgery, management of labour pain and postoperative pain. It has
also been used as a research tool for controlled comparison between
epidural and spinal techniques. The technique has been used successfully
in all age groups including ex-premature babies and in high-risk patients
(5).
CSE
- technical aspects There
are several options for performing the CSE block. In the early years
CSE blocks were performed with multiple-use extra long 25-30 G spinal
needles which were introduced through standard Tuohy needles. In recent
years special CSE needle sets have been introduced. At present there
are more than a dozen medical equipment companies that distribute specialized
CSE needle sets world-wide.
Needle-through-needle
technique Probably
the most popular technique for CSE block is the single segment needle-through-needle
technique. With the patient in the sitting or lateral decubitus position
an appropriate epidural needle is inserted at the desired intervertebral
space (below L2 ) and the epidural space is identified in
the usual manner. Next an extra long 27 G (or smaller diameter) spinal
needle is introduced through the epidural needle and advanced until
the tip of the spinal needle is felt to penetrate the dura (the dural
click). When the stilette is removed correct placement of
the spinal needle is confirmed by free flow (or aspiration) of CSF,
the appropriate dose of local anaesthetic and/or opioid is injected.
If loss-of-resistance to air is employed to identify the epidural space
any clear fluid coming out of the spinal needle will be CSF. The loss
of resistance felt when the epidural space is entered can be regarded
as a sign similar to the click of dural puncture felt with
the needle-through-needle technique when the spinal needle enters the
subarachnoid space. This click is not in itself an objective
sign, but the flow of CSF from the spinal needle hub is objective. A
subarachnoid injection of 2-3 ml hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% (10-15
mg) to which may be added fentanyl 20-25 µg is commenced (Table). Whilst
injecting into the subarachnoid space, the parturient is asked to report
feelings of warmth under the buttocks and thighs. If this symptom is
not reported within 30 sec, the dose has most probably not been delivered
intrathecally. This routine enables one to detect proper intrathecal
placement whilst the spinal needle is still in place.
It
is emphasized that at this stage the spinal needle is held in place
only by the dura mater, therefore there is a risk of needle displacement
during syringe connection or during injection of local anaesthetic.
This is a critical stage in the needle-through-needle technique). The
problem can be overcome by steadying the spinal needle as shown in figure
1. Spinal needle displacement may not be a problem with the newer special
CSE kits where the hub of the spinal needle locks into the hub of Tuohy
needle. After withdrawing the spinal needle a catheter is introduced
about 4-5 cm into the epidural space through the Tuohy needle. Epidural
catheter position is confirmed by negative aspiration of blood or
CSF. This is followed by injection of about 1 ml saline into the epidural
catheter to test its patency. The catheter is secured firmly with tape
and is now available for use during or after surgery.
Sequential CSE technique
Sympathetic
block-induced, precipitous, maternal hypotension remains one of the
commonest problems associated with subarachnoid block for caesarean
section. Despite prophylactic measures such as fluid preloading, prophylactic
vasopressors (ephedrine), elastic support stockings and lateral tilt
it may be difficult to maintain normal blood pressure. Maternal hypotension
may lead to maternal cerebral hypoperfusion and parasympathetic imbalance
may trigger nausea and vomiting. Uncorrected, maternal hypotension may
result in fetal hypoxemia and acidosis due to uteroplacental hypoperfusion.
To reduce the incidence and severity of hypotension a two stage sequential
CSE technique has been described. This technique is quite similar to
that described above, but the main differences are: a) the block is performed with the patient
in the sitting position, b) the dose of intrathecal hyperbaric
bupivacaine is intentionally kept low (5-10 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine
0.5% solution) because the aim is to achieve only a S5 to
T8-9 block, c) patient is then placed supine with
a left lateral tilt and, d) within 10 min the sensory block
is extended to T4 by injecting fractionated doses of local
anaesthetic (bupivacaine 0.2-0.25%) solution or normal saline into the
epidural catheter (less than 1-1.5 ml for every unblocked segment is
often sufficient) (Fig. 2).
The
sequential CSE technique may be particularly advantageous in high-risk
parturient, where gentler onset of sympathetic blockade is desirable.
This is important in patients with preeclampsia, phaeochromocytoma,
some cardiac disease or other conditions such as small stature where
the use of subarachnoid block alone may be hazardous or difficult to
control. This may also be the case with other high-risk patients in
the non-obstetric population, as for instance the very old orthopaedic
patient. Traditionally such patients are managed with slow epidural
blockade that requires much higher total dosages than sequential CSE.
By careful positioning of the patient prior to induction of subarachnoid
anaesthetic and by allowing titration with small incremental epidural
doses to the precise level of anaesthesia desired the sequential CSE
technique may enhance the safety of the central regional block.
Double-barrel or double-segment
CSE technique During
induction of CSE block using a needle-through-needle technique it may
occasionally be difficult to thread a catheter into the epidural space
after the subarachnoid injection. If some minutes are spent in replacing
the epidural needle the subarachnoid block may become fixed
in the dependent area. If difficulty is experienced threading the catheter,
its insertion should be abandoned or attempted at another level. Subarachnoid
anaesthesia may obscure paresthesia during epidural catheter insertion.
Moreover, it may be difficult to verify the position of the epidural
catheter because of difficulty in identifying unintentional subarachnoid
or subdural injections in the presence of the existing spinal block.
These
problems may be overcome if the epidural catheter is introduced prior
to the subarachnoid injection. Placement of the epidural catheter before
subarachnoid injection can be accomplished by the use of one of the
single segment double-barreled needles or by using the separate
spaces technique. Yet another approach is to insert the spinal needle
in the same lumbar segment adjacent to the epidural needle already in
place.
However,
prior placement of an epidural catheter does not necessarily guarantee
increased success rate. A Swedish survey from 1993 showed that departments
using double interspace technique for CSE (epidural first, then subarachnoid
injection) reported more epidural catheter penetrations through the
dura than departments using a single interspace CSE technique. since
epidural catheter migration can occur over time only a recently injected
epidural test dose holds significance. In our opinion an epidural test
dose prior to spinal block is of little use if the epidural catheter
is to be activated after surgery. Furthermore, if an epidural test dose
is administered before the subarachnoid injection, a portion of this
test dose may appear in the hub of the spinal needle and create confusion.
Finally, the direction of epidural catheter passage is unpredictable.
Radiological and video epiduroscopic studies have shown that epidural
catheters may take unpredictable paths. A catheter may even tie itself
in a knot. It is hence conceivable that a prior-positioned epidural
catheter may divert the spinal needle.
Whether
the epidural catheter is introduced before or after the subarachnoid
injection and irrespective of the CSE technique used it should be remembered
that accidental subdural catheter placement can occur and that this
is more common than generally believed. This may account for such phenomena
as delayed onset, profound and extensive blockade, Horners syndrome
and for unexplained headaches, total spinals and neurological
sequelae. The commonly used safeguards, aspiration and test dose may
be unreliable because they cannot detect subdural placement.
So
far, there is no controlled study that has compared morbidity after
single versus double interspace techniques nor has morbidity been compared
between needle-through-needle and double-barrel
needle techniques. Compared with introducing needles into two interspaces,
the single interspace technique may be expected to cause considerably
less discomfort, trauma and morbidity from interspinous tissue penetration
including backache, epidural venous puncture, hematoma, infection and
technical difficulties.
In
conclusion, it is obvious that either sequence has its advantages and
disadvantages. However, if the patient is experiencing severe pain,
e.g. in labour, when the block is being
Summary Although
epidural and spinal blocks are well-accepted regional techniques they
have several disadvantages. Combined spinal epidural technique reduces
or eliminates the risks of these disadvantages. The CSE technique has
attained widespread popularity for patients undergoing major surgery
below the umbilical level who require prolonged and effective postoperative
analgesia. Epiduroscopy and spinaloscopy, as well as the newer radiological
imaging techniques, have revealed new insights into the anatomical
structures in the lumbar epidural and subarachnoid areas, thus improving
the performance and safety of central regional blocks. The CSE technique
is now well established in many institutions.
References
and suggested reading 1. Carrie LES. Extradural spinal or combined
spinal block for obstetric surgical anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 1990;65:225-33. 2. Rawal N, Schollin J, Wesström G. Epidural
versus combined spinal epidural block for Caesarean section. Acta Anaesthesiol
Scand 1988;32:61-6. 3. Thorén T, Holmström B, Rawal N, Schollin
J, Lindeberg S, Skeppner G. Sequential combined spinal epidural block
versus spinal block for cesarean section: effects on maternal hypotension
and neurobehavioral function of the newborn. Anesth Analg 1994;78:1087-92. 4. Gautier PE, Debry F, Fanard L, Van Steenberge
A, Hody JL. Ambulatory combined spinal-epidural for labor. Influence
of epinephrine on bupivacaine-sufentanil combination. Reg Anesth1997;22:143-149. 5. Rawal N, Van Zundert A, Holmström B, Crowhurst
JA. Combined spinal-epidural technique. Reg Anesth 1997;22:406-423. Cook
TM. Combined spinal-epidural techniques (Review). Anaesthesia
2000;55:42-64. Eisenach JC. Combined spinal-epidural analgesia in obstetrics. Anesthesiology
1999;91:299-302.
|