Anesth Analg 2004;98:89-94
© 2004 International Anesthesia Research Society
AMBULATORY ANESTHESIA
Spinal 2-Chloroprocaine: The Effect of Added Fentanyl
Julie S. Vath, MD, and
Dan J. Kopacz, MD
From the Department of Anesthesiology, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
Address correspondence to Dr. Kopacz, Department of Anesthesiology, Virginia Mason Clinic, 1100 Ninth Avenue, B2-AN, PO Box 900, Seattle, WA 98111. Address email to anedjk{at}vmmc.org
Chloroprocaine is being investigated as a possible replacement for spinal lidocaine. Adding fentanyl to lidocaine increases the quality of spinal anesthesia without prolongation of block. We report the characteristics of 2-chloroprocaine (2-CP) spinal anesthesia with or without fentanyl in 8 volunteers receiving 40 mg 2-CP with saline or 20 µg fentanyl in a double-blinded, randomized, crossover manner. Spinal anesthesia was successful for all subjects with complete block regression, ambulation, and void by 110 min. Itching occurred in all subjects receiving fentanyl, though medication was not required. No subject reported signs of transient neurological symptoms. Peak block with fentanyl averaged T5 (T37) and without fentanyl T9 (L1T4) (P = 0.005). Regression to L1 was 78 ± 7 min with fentanyl and 53 ± 19 min without fentanyl (P = 0.02). Tourniquet was tolerated for 51 ± 8 min with fentanyl and for 34 ± 14 min without fentanyl (P = 0.02). Complete regression of block occurred at 104 ± 7 min with fentanyl and by 95 ± 9 min without fentanyl (P = 0.02). We conclude that 2-CP spinal anesthesia provides rapid onset and adequate potency, giving it a positive profile for ambulatory surgery. The addition of fentanyl lengthens regression to L1 and tourniquet tolerance while minimally lengthening block duration.
IMPLICATIONS: Spinal 2-chloroprocaine (40 mg) provides rapid onset and reliable blockade without signs of transient neurological symptoms, giving it a positive profile for ambulatory surgical settings. The addition of fentanyl appears to lengthen the regression to L1 dermatome and tourniquet time while minimally lengthening duration of block.
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Casati, G. Danelli, M. Berti, A. Fioro, A. Fanelli, C. Benassi, G. Petronella, and G. Fanelli
Intrathecal 2-chloroprocaine for lower limb outpatient surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, clinical evaluation.
Anesth. Analg.,
July 1, 2006;
103(1):
234 - 238.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Drasner
Chloroprocaine Spinal Anesthesia: Back to the Future?
Anesth. Analg.,
February 1, 2005;
100(2):
549 - 552.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. R. Yoos and D. J. Kopacz
Spinal 2-Chloroprocaine for Surgery: An Initial 10-Month Experience
Anesth. Analg.,
February 1, 2005;
100(2):
553 - 558.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. R. Davis and D. J. Kopacz
Spinal 2-Chloroprocaine: The Effect of Added Clonidine
Anesth. Analg.,
February 1, 2005;
100(2):
559 - 565.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. R. Yoos and D. J. Kopacz
Spinal 2-Chloroprocaine: A Comparison with Small-Dose Bupivacaine in Volunteers
Anesth. Analg.,
February 1, 2005;
100(2):
566 - 572.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. F. Gonter and D. J. Kopacz
Spinal 2-Chloroprocaine: A Comparison with Procaine in Volunteers
Anesth. Analg.,
February 1, 2005;
100(2):
573 - 579.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|