Indian Journal of Anaesthesia  
About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions
Home | Login  | Users Online: 410  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size    


CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 56  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 250-254

Correlation between spinous process dimensions and ease of spinal anaesthesia


1 Department of Anesthesiology, Clement Zablocki VA Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI, USA
2 Department of Anesthesiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
3 Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

Correspondence Address:
Hariharan Shankar
Department of Anesthesiology, Clement Zablocki VA Medical Center and Medical College of Wisconsin 5000, West National Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53295
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0019-5049.98769

Rights and Permissions

Background: Neuraxial anaesthesia, despite being a common technique, may pose some technical challenges leading to complications such as post-dural puncture headache, trauma to neural structures and neuraxial haematoma. We hypothesised that the interspinous gap (ISG) and the spinous process width (SPW) could be used as objective measures to predict ease of access to the neuraxial space. Methods: Two hundred and two consecutive patients scheduled to have spinal anaesthesia for various surgical procedures were enrolled prospectively after institutional approval. Following proper positioning for the neuraxial blockade, the ISG and SPW at the intended level were measured with calipers. The number of attempts, and redirections at the selected spinal level, and the number of levels required for successful needle placement were also recorded. Results: Group-wise analysis of the data into patients requiring >1 attempt, >1 level and ≥3 redirections showed that the single independent predictor of a difficult neuraxial block was the ISG. Twenty-three percent of the patients required more than one attempt, with a mean gap of 6.35 (±1.2) mm, in contrast to 8.15 (±2.4) mm in those with a single attempt (P=0.000). In addition, 16% of the patients needed more than one level, with a mean gap of 6.03 (±2.01) mm in contrast to 8.07 (±2.37) mm for a single level (P=0.000). Conclusions: The single independent predictor of ease or difficulty during spinal anaesthesia was the ISG (P=0.000).


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2686    
    Printed70    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded680    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal