This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (4) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Shono, A. Articles by Yokokawa, N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Shono, A. Articles by Yokokawa, N. Related Collections Regional Anesthesia Pharmacology

---

REGIONAL ANESTHESIA

Sevoflurane Requirements to Suppress Responses to Transcutaneous Electrical Stimulation During Epidural Anesthesia with 0.5% and 1% Lidocaine

Department of Anesthesiology, Shimane Medical University, Izumo City, Japan

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Shinichi Sakura, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, Shimane Medical University, 89-1 Enya-cho, Izumo City, 693-8501 Japan. Address e-mail to ssakura{at}shimane-med.ac.jp

We sought to determine general anesthetic requirements to suppress skin vasomotor reflex (SVmR) and pupillary dilation (PD) in response to transcutaneous electrical stimulation (TES) during combined epidural-general anesthesia. Thirty-five patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery were randomly divided into 2 groups to epidurally receive 0.5% (Group 1) or 1% lidocaine (Group 2) with sevoflurane anesthesia. A bolus injection of either lidocaine was followed by the infusion of the same solution, and the central dermatomal level of loss of cold sensation (C) was determined. After the induction of general anesthesia with 5% sevoflurane and 67% nitrous oxide, nitrous oxide was discontinued, and sevoflurane concentration was decreased. TES was given at both site C and site three dermatomal segments (U) cephalad to C to determine the end-tidal sevoflurane concentration required to suppress SVmR and PD. End-tidal sevoflurane concentration that suppressed both responses was larger in Group 1 than in Group 2 at both sites and was larger at site U than at site C in both groups. We conclude that sevoflurane requirements to suppress SVmR and PD in response to TES during combined epidural-general anesthesia are different depending on the concentration of lidocaine and the site where surgical stimulation is applied.

IMPLICATIONS: We evaluated sevoflurane requirements to suppress skin vasomotor reflex and pupillary dilation in response to a transcutaneous electrical stimulation at the surgical site during combined epidural-general anesthesia. Our results indicate that when epidural anesthesia is combined, general anesthetic requirements decrease depending on the lidocaine concentration for epidural anesthesia and the site where surgical stimulation is applied.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Zhang, W. Zhang, and B. Li The Effect of Epidural Anesthesia with Different Concentrations of Ropivacaine on Sevoflurane Requirements Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2007; 104(4): 984 - 986. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]