Evaluation of efficacy and safety of Taylor's approach for neuraxial blockade in infraumbilical surgeries with difficult lumbar access: a retrospective, single-centre study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20250974Keywords:
Taylor’s approach, Infraumbilical, Stocker’s formula, SubarachnoidAbstract
Background: Spinal block, commonly known as subarachnoid anesthesia, is the most popular method for performing lower extremity procedures. In patients with difficult spinal anatomy, the Taylor modified paramedian technique has proven to be beneficial. This study aim is to assess the efficacy and safety of Taylor's technique in a heterogeneous group.
Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted from March 2018 to August 2024, involving 68 patients aged between 18 and 80 years, classified as ASA I–III. The study focused on patients with degenerative diseases or spinal anomalies that complicated lumbar puncture procedures. For regional anaesthesia, lumbar subarachnoid blocks (LSAB) were administered using Taylor's method. Data on drug dosages, complications, outcomes and procedure parameters were collected and analysed.
Results: The mean time to onset of sensory and motor block was 8.26 minutes, while the mean regression time was 197.98 minutes. The procedure was successful in 97.06% of cases and a large study population needed 2–3 needle redirection attempts. Mean depth of lumbar puncture measured with Stocker's formula was 63.81 mm, which matched nearly with that of the calculated depth. Trendelenburg position was preserved for 10 minutes facilitating anaesthetic flow. The most frequent reasons for disability in the implementation of LSAB were lumbar spinal disorders 48.11% , obesity 35.85% and 16.04% had difficulty in sitting due to pain.
Conclusions: The modified paramedian approach from Taylor's for LSAB is effective, rapid, and reliable technique.
Metrics
References
Cousins MJ. Neural blockade in clinical anaesthesia and pain management. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. 1998.
Liu SS, McDonld SB. Current issues in spinal anaesthesia. Anaesthesiol. 2001;94:888–906. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-200105000-00030
Johnson RL, Kopp SL, Burkle CM, Duncan CM, Jacob AK, Erwin PJ, et al. Neuraxial vs general anaesthesia for total hip and total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of comparative-effectiveness research. BJA: British J Anaesth. 2016;116(2):163-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aev455
Anesthesia technique and mortality after total hip or knee arthroplasty: a retrospective, propensity score-matched cohort study. Perlas A, Chan VWS, Beattie S. Anesthesiology. 2016;125:724–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000001248
General anesthesia vs spinal anesthesia for patients undergoing total-hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. Pu X, Sun J-M. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98:14925. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000014925
Chu CC, Weng SF, Chen KT, Chien CC, Shieh JP, Chen JY, et al.Propensity score-matched comparison of postoperative adverse outcomes between geriatric patients given a general or a neuraxial anesthetic for hip surgery: a population-based study. Anesthesiology. 2015;123:136–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000000695
McIsaac DI, Wijeysundera DN, Huang A, Bryson GL, van Walraven C. Association of hospital-level neuraxial anesthesia use for hip fracture surgery with outcomes: a population-based cohort study. Anesthesiology. 2018;128:480–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000001899
Anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery in adults. Guay J, Parker MJ, Gajendragadkar PR, Kopp S. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2:521.
Dr P. Chalapathy, Dr. E. Jayasundaram. Taylors approach is best apporoach to overcome difficulty in lumbar puncture in difficult spinal cases. IORS-JDMS. 2016;12-5.
Litz, R.J, Brandt, M., Wiessner, D., et al. spinal anaesthesia using Taylors lumbosacral approach reducing incidence and severity of hemodynamic side effect in patient undergoing transuretheral surgery. EJA. 2006;23:114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003643-200606001-00406
Jindal P, Chopra G, Chaudhary A, Rizvi AA, Sharma JP. Taylor’s approach in an ankylosing spondylitis patient posted for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A challenge for anesthesiologists. Saudi J Anaesth. 2009;3(2):87-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.57879
Halder B, Narayan A K, Shandilya A S, Taylors approach as a savior in difficult spine anatomy. Indian J Clin Anaesth 2020;7(4):700-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18231/j.ijca.2020.126
Banerjee S, Hazra S, Banerjee A. Effect of position Trendelenburg and horizontal on the height of sensory block in patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery. 2023;3:56.
Kirby GA, Guo W, Mitchell JD, Ma H. Using Lumbar X-Ray to facilitate modified taylor's approach of spinal anesthesia in an elderly patient with scoliosis. Cureus. 2021;13(1):12556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.12556
McLain RF, Kalfas I, Bell GR, Tetzlaff JE, Yoon HJ, Rana M. Comparison of spinal and general anesthesia in lumbar laminectomy surgery: a case-controlled analysis of 400 patients. J of Neurosurg: Spine 2005;2:17–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3171/spi.2005.2.1.0017
Karaman S, Karaman T, Dogru S. Retrospective evaluation of anesthesia approaches for lumbar disc surgery. J of Anesthesia and Clinical Research 2014;5:4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-6148.1000402
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
