A Comparison between Preloading with Voluven or Lactated Ringer’s Solution on Hemodynamic Status during Lower Extremity Orthopedic Procedures

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Anesthesia, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 Student of Medicine, School of Medicine AND Student Research Committee, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

3 Epidemiologist, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Spinal anesthesia is often recommended as a safe and preferred substitute for general anesthesia. The hemodynamic benefits of spinal anesthesia over general anesthesia include a minimum decrease in myocardial contractility and only modest decreases in blood pressure and cardiac output. However, spinal anesthesia is associated with some complications (such as unstable hemodynamic status) during surgery that may lead to mortality in patients under operation. Hydroxyethyl starch (Voluven) is a substance used to preserve a patient’s hemodynamic stability during surgery. This study compared the use of lactated Ringer’s solution and Voluven as preload in patients under spinal anesthesia.Methods: This clinical trial study was performed in Kashani Hospital (Isfahan, Iran) during 2012. We selected 80 patients who were scheduled for lower extremity orthopedic procedures under spinal anesthesia. The subjects were randomly allocated to two groups and preloaded with either lactated Ringer’s solution or Voluven for 20 minutes. Hemodynamic indexes including blood pressure, heart rate, and oxygen saturation were monitored before the surgery and at the first, third, fifth, tenth, fifteenth, and thirtieth minutes after the operation. The collected data was analyzed with SPSS.Findings: The mean systolic blood pressure in the lactated Ringer’s solution group was 129.3 ± 16.7 mmHg at baseline and 113.2 ± 16.2 mmHg at the end of the operation. The corresponding values in the Voluven group were 128.1 ± 14.3 and 113.8 ± 16.1 mmHg. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of systolic or diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, and oxygen saturation.Conclusion: Although using Voluven in spinal anesthesia is supposed to result in better hemodynamic stability, we failed to find a significant difference between Voluven and lactated Ringer’s solution. Therefore, either of them can be used for preloading based on their cost and availability.

Keywords

References

  1. Maurer SG, Chen AL, Hiebert R, Pereira GC, Di Cesare PE. Comparison of outcomes of using spinal versus general anesthesia in total hip arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2007; 36(7): E101-E106.
  2. Carpenter RL, Caplan RA, Brown DL, Stephenson C, Wu R. Incidence and risk factors for side effects of spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1992; 76(6): 906-16.
  3. Critchley LA, Stuart JC, Short TG, Gin T. Haemodynamic effects of subarachnoid block in elderly patients. Br J Anaesth 1994; 73(4): 464-70.
  4. Juelsgaard P, Sand NP, Felsby S, Dalsgaard J, Jakobsen KB, Brink O, et al. Perioperative myocardial ischaemia in patients undergoing surgery for fractured hip randomized to incremental spinal, single-dose spinal or general anaesthesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1998; 15(6): 656-63.
  5. Rooke GA, Freund PR, Jacobson AF. Hemodynamic response and change in organ blood volume during spinal anesthesia in elderly men with cardiac disease. Anesth Analg 1997; 85(1): 99-105.
  6. Cyna AM, Andrew M, Emmett RS, Middleton P, Simmons SW. Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; (4): CD002251.
  7. Dahlgren G, Granath F, Pregner K, Rosblad PG, Wessel H, Irestedt L. Colloid vs. crystalloid preloading to prevent maternal hypotension during spinal anesthesia for elective Cesarean section. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2005; 49(8): 1200-6.
  8. Dahlgren G, Granath F, Wessel H, Irestedt L. Prediction of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for Cesarean section and its relation to the effect of crystalloid or colloid preload. Int J Obstet Anesth 2007; 16(2): 128-34.
  9. Kinsella SM, Pirlet M, Mills MS, Tuckey JP, Thomas TA. Randomized study of intravenous fluid preload before epidural analgesia during labour. Br J Anaesth 2000; 85(2): 311-3.
  10. Rout C, Rocke DA. Spinal hypotension associated with Cesarean section: will preload ever work? Anesthesiology 1999; 91(6): 1565-7.
  11. Jackson R, Reid JA, Thorburn J. Volume preloading is not essential to prevent spinal-induced hypotension at Cesarean section. Br J Anaesth 1995; 75: 262-5.
  12. Husaini SW, Russell IF. Volume preload: lack of effect in the prevention of spinal-induced hypotension at caesarean section. Int J Obstet Anesth 1998; 7(2): 76-81.
  13. Liu FC, Liao CH, Chang YW, Liou JT, Day YJ. Hydroxyethyl starch interferes with human blood ex vivo coagulation, platelet function and sedimentation. Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwan 2009; 47(2): 71-8.
  14. Tiryakioglu O, Yildiz G, Vural H, Goncu T, Ozyazicioglu A, Yavuz S. Hydroxyethyl starch versus Ringer solution in cardiopulmonary bypass prime solutions (a randomized controlled trial). J Cardiothorac Surg 2008; 3: 45.
  15. Avorn J, Patel M, Levin R, Winkelmayer WC. Hetastarch and bleeding complications after coronary artery surgery. Chest 2003; 124(4): 1437-42.
  16. Deusch E, Thaler U, Kozek-Langenecker SA. The effects of high molecular weight hydroxyethyl starch solutions on platelets. Anesth Analg 2004; 99(3): 665-8, table.
  17. Haisch G, Boldt J, Krebs C, Suttner S, Lehmann A, Isgro F. Influence of a new hydroxyethylstarch preparation (HES 130/0.4) on coagulation in cardiac surgical patients. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2001; 15(3): 316-21.
  18. Ueyama H, He YL, Tanigami H, Mashimo T, Yoshiya I. Effects of crystalloid and colloid preload on blood volume in the parturient undergoing spinal anesthesia for elective Cesarean section. Anesthesiology 1999; 91(6): 1571-6.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 31, Issue 224 - Serial Number 224
January and February 2013
Pages 50-58

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 16 January 2013
  • Revise Date: 02 May 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics