Spinal anesthesia using single injection small-dose @entity1341 versus continuous catheter injection techniques for surgical repair of XXXX in elderly @entity1 .

@entity1 @entity6358 @entity173 @entity1341 @entity551
Aging and disease may make elderly @entity1 particularly susceptible to @entity551 during spinal anesthesia. We compared the hemodynamic effect of continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA) and small dose single injection spinal anesthesia (SA) regarding the incidence of @entity551 . Seventy-four @entity1 aged >75 yr undergoing surgical repair of @entity173 were randomized into 2 groups of 37 @entity1 each. Group CSA received a continuous spinal anesthetic with a titration of 2.5 mg boluses every 15 min of isobaric @entity1341 , while group SA received a single injection spinal anesthetic with 7.5 mg of isobaric @entity1341 . The overall variations in noninvasive automated arterial blood pressure were not statistically significantly different in the 2 groups at baseline and after CSA or SA (not significant). In the SA group, 68% of @entity1 experienced at least one episode of @entity551 ( @entity551 greater than 20% of baseline value) versus 31% of @entity1 in the CSA group (P = 0.005). In the SA group, 51% of @entity1 experienced at least one episode of severe @entity551 ( @entity551 more than 30% of baseline value) versus 8% of @entity1 in the CSA group (P < 0.0001). In the CSA group, 4.5 +/- 2 mg of @entity6358 was injected versus 11 +/- 2 mg in the SA group (P = 0.005). In the CSA group, 5 mg (2.5-10) of anesthetic solution was required versus 7.5 mg in the SA group (P < 0.0001). We conclude that, in elderly @entity1 undergoing @entity173 repair, CSA provides fewer episodes of @entity551 and severe @entity551 compared with a single intrathecal injection of 7.5 mg @entity1341 .
