Users Online: 884 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  
Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Subscribe | Contacts | Login 

 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 37  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 205-209

Comparison of the time taken for subarachnoid block using ultrasound-guided method versus landmark technique for cesarean section – A randomized controlled study


1 Department of Anaesthesiology, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, Chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu, India
2 Department of Anaesthesiology, Government Dharmapuri Medical College Hospital, Dharmapuri, Tamil Nadu, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. C K Swetha Ramani
3083, Estancia, Vallancherry, Guduvancherry, Chennai - 603 202, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/joacp.JOACP_35_20

Rights and Permissions

Background and Aims: Spinal anesthesia is the regional technique preferred for cesarean section and is usually administered using the traditional landmark technique. Ultrasonography of the spine appears to be helpful in locating the puncture site and increasing the success rate. The primary objective of this study was to assess the use of ultrasonogram in locating the lumbar interspinous space for spinal anesthesia in laboring parturients brought for elective cesarean section. Material and Methods: Sixty parturients scheduled to undergo elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia were included in this prospective randomized controlled trial, after obtaining the institutional ethical clearance. In Group I, 30 patients received spinal anesthesia by landmark technique and in Group II, 30 patients underwent ultrasound-guided spinal anesthesia. The statistical analysis was done using SPSS software version 17 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA) for Microsoft windows. Results: The time taken for spinal in Group I was longer than in Group II (62 ± 18s; 41 ± 11s; P = 0.0001). The number of attempts of needle insertion was significantly less in Group II (group I 1.86 ± 1.04: group II 1.06 ± 0.25). However, the total preparation time (28 8.30 ± 92 vs 804.73 ± 77; P = 0.0001) was more in the ultrasound-guided than in the landmark group. The patients had better satisfaction in group II. Conclusion: Preprocedural ultrasound is a useful tool for successful lumbar puncture in parturients as it minimizes the number of attempts of needle insertion and provides better patient satisfaction.


[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
    Viewed174    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded29    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal