4.6 Article

Caudal anaesthesia under sedation: a prospective analysis of 512 infants and children

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA
Volume 104, Issue 6, Pages 751-755

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/bja/aeq082

Keywords

children; complications; epidural; infants; regional anaesthesia

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Caudal anaesthesia is a common procedure for infants and children undergoing subumbilical surgery, mostly performed in conjunction with general anaesthesia. Even if complications are rare, the risk of postoperative apnoea is significant, especially in infants born preterm or operated upon before 46 weeks of post-conceptual age. Caudal block in sedated, spontaneously breathing patients might be a safe alternative. We investigated 512 infants and children. Premedication consisted of midazolam, sedation was induced with i.v. nalbuphine 0.1 mg kg(-1) and propofol 1 mg kg(-1), and maintained with propofol 5 mg kg(-1) h(-1) in children, if necessary. Caudal block was performed with ropivacaine 1 ml kg(-1) (0.2% or 0.35%). Data were obtained from 228 infants and 284 children. Median (IQR) age was 1.3 (0.2, 3.4) yr; median body weight was 10.0 (4.8, 15.3) kg. Two hundred and thirty-three (45.51%) were born preterm and 47 (9.18%) were operated upon before 46 weeks of post-conceptual age. Caudal block was successful in 98.05% and adverse events occurred in 7.03% patients. The incidence of adverse events was not higher in born preterm or operated upon before 46 weeks of post-conceptual age than in term born infants (P=0.35 and 0.35, respectively), or in infants vs children (P=0.61). There was no correlation between the incidence of adverse events and continuous sedation (P=0.07), coexisting diseases (P=0.11), or ASA classification (P=0.33). Caudal anaesthesia under sedation is associated with high success rates and a low incidence of adverse events, but requires careful and anticipatory perioperative management.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available