Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Anesthesiology 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Abdominal girth and vertebral column length can adjust spinal anesthesia for lower limb surgery, a prospective, observational study

Authors: Qing-he Zhou, Bo Zhu, Chang-na Wei, Min Yan

Published in: BMC Anesthesiology | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Studies have shown that abdominal girth and vertebral column length have high predictive value for spinal spread after administering a dose of plain bupivacaine. we designed a study to identify the specific correlations between abdominal girth, vertebral column length and a 0.5 % dosage of plain bupivacaine, which should provide a minimum upper block level (T12) and a suitable upper block level (T10) for lower limb surgeries.

Methods

A suitable dose of 0.5 % plain bupivacaine was administered intrathecally between the L3 and L4 vertebrae for lower limb surgeries. If the upper cephalad spread of the patient by loss of pinprick discrimination was T12 or T10, the patient was enrolled in this study. Five patient variables and intrathecal plain bupivacaine dose were recorded. Linear regression and multiple regression analyses were performed.

Results

Totals of 111 patients and 121 patients who lost pinprick discrimination at T12 and T10, respectively, were analyzed in this study. Linear regression analysis showed that only abdominal girth and plain bupivacaine dose were strongly correlated (r =−0.827 for T12, r = −0.806 for T10; both p < 0.0001). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that both abdominal girth and vertebral column length were the key determinants of plain bupivacaine dose (both p < 0.0001). R2 was 0.874 and 0.860 for the loss of pinprick discrimination at T12 and T10, respectively.

Conclusions

Our data indicated that vertebral column length and abdominal girth were strongly correlated with the dosage of intrathecal plain bupivacaine for the loss of pinprick discrimination at T12 and T10. The two regression equations were YT12 = 3.547 + 0.045X1-0.044X2 and YT10 = 3.848 + 0.047X1- 0.046X2 (Y, 0.5 % plain bupivacaine volume; X1, vertebral column length;and X 2, abdominal girth), which can accurately predict the minimum and suitable intrathecal bupivacaine dose for lower limb surgery to a great extent, separately.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Pargger H, Hampl KF, Aeschbach A, Paganoni R, Schneider MC. Combined effect of patient variables on sensory level after spinal 0.5% plain bupivacaine. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1998;42:430–4.CrossRefPubMed Pargger H, Hampl KF, Aeschbach A, Paganoni R, Schneider MC. Combined effect of patient variables on sensory level after spinal 0.5% plain bupivacaine. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1998;42:430–4.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Schiffer E, Van Gessel E, Fournier R, Weber A, Gamulin Z. Cerebrospinal fluid density influences extent of plain bupivacaine spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 2002;96:1325–30.CrossRefPubMed Schiffer E, Van Gessel E, Fournier R, Weber A, Gamulin Z. Cerebrospinal fluid density influences extent of plain bupivacaine spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 2002;96:1325–30.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Taivainen T, Tuominen M, Rosenberg PH. Influence of obesity on the spread of spinal analgesia after injection of plain 0.5 % bupivacaine at the L3-4 or L4-5 interspace. Br J Anaesth. 1990;64:542–6.CrossRefPubMed Taivainen T, Tuominen M, Rosenberg PH. Influence of obesity on the spread of spinal analgesia after injection of plain 0.5 % bupivacaine at the L3-4 or L4-5 interspace. Br J Anaesth. 1990;64:542–6.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Niemi L, Tuominen M, Pitkänen M, Rosenberg PH. Effect of late posture change on the level of spinal anaesthesia with plain bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth. 1993;71:807–9.CrossRefPubMed Niemi L, Tuominen M, Pitkänen M, Rosenberg PH. Effect of late posture change on the level of spinal anaesthesia with plain bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth. 1993;71:807–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Carvalho B, Durbin M, Drover DR, Cohen SE, Ginosar Y, Riley ET. The ED50 and ED95 of intrathecal isobaric bupivacaine with opioids for cesarean delivery. Anesthesiology. 2005;103:606–12.CrossRefPubMed Carvalho B, Durbin M, Drover DR, Cohen SE, Ginosar Y, Riley ET. The ED50 and ED95 of intrathecal isobaric bupivacaine with opioids for cesarean delivery. Anesthesiology. 2005;103:606–12.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Logan MR, McClure JH, Wildsmith JA. Plain bupivacaine: an unpredictable spinal anaesthetic agent. Br J Anaesth. 1986;58:292–6.CrossRefPubMed Logan MR, McClure JH, Wildsmith JA. Plain bupivacaine: an unpredictable spinal anaesthetic agent. Br J Anaesth. 1986;58:292–6.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Greene NM. Distribution of local anesthetic solutions within the subarachnoid space. Anesth Analg. 1985;64:715–30.CrossRefPubMed Greene NM. Distribution of local anesthetic solutions within the subarachnoid space. Anesth Analg. 1985;64:715–30.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Stienstra R, Greene NM. Factors affecting the subarachnoid spread of local anesthetic solutions. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1991;16:1–6. Stienstra R, Greene NM. Factors affecting the subarachnoid spread of local anesthetic solutions. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1991;16:1–6.
9.
10.
go back to reference Carpenter RL, Hogan QH, Liu SS, Crane B, Moore J. Lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume is the primary determinant of sensory block extent and duration during spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1998;89:24–9.CrossRefPubMed Carpenter RL, Hogan QH, Liu SS, Crane B, Moore J. Lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume is the primary determinant of sensory block extent and duration during spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1998;89:24–9.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Hogan QH, Prost R, Kulier A, Taylor ML, Liu S, Mark L. Magnetic resonance imaging of cerebrospinal fluid volume and the influence of body habitus and abdominal pressure. Anesthesiology. 1996;84:1341–9.CrossRefPubMed Hogan QH, Prost R, Kulier A, Taylor ML, Liu S, Mark L. Magnetic resonance imaging of cerebrospinal fluid volume and the influence of body habitus and abdominal pressure. Anesthesiology. 1996;84:1341–9.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Pitkänen MT. Body mass and spread of spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine. Anesth Analg. 1987;66:127–31.CrossRefPubMed Pitkänen MT. Body mass and spread of spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine. Anesth Analg. 1987;66:127–31.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Pitkänen M, Haapaniemi L, Tuominen M, Rosenberg PH. Influence of age on spinal anaesthesia with isobararic 0.5 % bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth. 1984;56:279–84.CrossRefPubMed Pitkänen M, Haapaniemi L, Tuominen M, Rosenberg PH. Influence of age on spinal anaesthesia with isobararic 0.5 % bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth. 1984;56:279–84.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference McCulloch WJ, Littlewood DG. Influence of obesity on spinal analgesia with isobaric 0.5 % bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth. 1986;58:610–4.CrossRefPubMed McCulloch WJ, Littlewood DG. Influence of obesity on spinal analgesia with isobaric 0.5 % bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth. 1986;58:610–4.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Zhou QH, Xiao WP, Shen YY. Abdominal girth, vertebral column length, and spread of spinal anesthesia in 30 minutes after plain bupivacaine 5 mg/mL. Anesth Analg. 2014;119:203–6.CrossRefPubMed Zhou QH, Xiao WP, Shen YY. Abdominal girth, vertebral column length, and spread of spinal anesthesia in 30 minutes after plain bupivacaine 5 mg/mL. Anesth Analg. 2014;119:203–6.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Tuominen M, Pitkänen M, Rosenberg PH. Effect of speed of injection of 0.5% plain bupivacaine on the spread of spinal anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 1992;69:148–9.CrossRefPubMed Tuominen M, Pitkänen M, Rosenberg PH. Effect of speed of injection of 0.5% plain bupivacaine on the spread of spinal anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 1992;69:148–9.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Sugerman H, Windsor A, Bessos M, Wolfe L. Intra-abdominal pressure, sagittal abdominal diameter and obesity comorbidity. J Intern Med. 1997;241:71–9.CrossRefPubMed Sugerman H, Windsor A, Bessos M, Wolfe L. Intra-abdominal pressure, sagittal abdominal diameter and obesity comorbidity. J Intern Med. 1997;241:71–9.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Sullivan JT, Grouper S, Walker MT, Parrish TB, McCarthy RJ, Wong CA. Lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume in humans using three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. Anesth Analg. 2006;103:1306–10.CrossRefPubMed Sullivan JT, Grouper S, Walker MT, Parrish TB, McCarthy RJ, Wong CA. Lumbosacral cerebrospinal fluid volume in humans using three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. Anesth Analg. 2006;103:1306–10.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Sell A, Olkkola KT, Jalonen J, Aantaa R. Isobaric bupivacaine via spinal catheter for hip replacement surgery: ED50 and ED95 dose determination. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2006;50:217–21.CrossRefPubMed Sell A, Olkkola KT, Jalonen J, Aantaa R. Isobaric bupivacaine via spinal catheter for hip replacement surgery: ED50 and ED95 dose determination. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2006;50:217–21.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Danelli G, Zangrillo A, Nucera D, Giorgi E, Fanelli G, Senatore R, et al. The minimum effective dose of 0.5 % hyperbaric spinal bupivacaine for cesarean section. Minerva Anestesiol. 2001;67:573–7.PubMed Danelli G, Zangrillo A, Nucera D, Giorgi E, Fanelli G, Senatore R, et al. The minimum effective dose of 0.5 % hyperbaric spinal bupivacaine for cesarean section. Minerva Anestesiol. 2001;67:573–7.PubMed
21.
go back to reference Reynolds F. Damage to the conus medullaris following spinal anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 2001;56:238–47.CrossRefPubMed Reynolds F. Damage to the conus medullaris following spinal anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 2001;56:238–47.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Abdominal girth and vertebral column length can adjust spinal anesthesia for lower limb surgery, a prospective, observational study
Authors
Qing-he Zhou
Bo Zhu
Chang-na Wei
Min Yan
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2253
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-016-0184-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Anesthesiology 1/2015 Go to the issue