Comparison of spinal versus caudal epidural anesthesia in the management of patients undergoing ambulatory perianal surgery: Randomized, prospective study

Objective: To compare levobupivacaine based caudal epidural anesthesia and spinal anesthesia in terms of Intraoperative hemodynamic changes and postoperative pain and patient comfort in subjects undergoing perianal surgery in outpatient setting. Material and methods: All consecutive patients who were scheduled for perianal surgery. The difference in intraoperative hemodynamic changes, sensory and motor block level, postoperative pain and patient comfort was the primary outcome measure of this study. Results: There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of mean arterial pressure and heart rate recorded. Subjects randomized to spinal anesthesia had a significantl extensive motor and sensory block compared to those randomized to caudal epidural anesthesia. Visual analogue scale scores for surgical pain at postoperative 12 hours was significantly higher in subjects receiving spinal anesthesia compared to those receiving caudal epidural anesthesia (p< 0.05). Time to first analgesic administration was significantly lower in subjects randomized to spinal anesthesia compared to those receiving caudal epidural anesthesia (p< 0.01). Conclusion: Spinal anesthesia is associated with more extensive sensory and motor block compared to caudal epidural anesthesia in patients undergoing perianal surgery. Both techniques lead to similar hemodynamic changes. Postoperative pain control is more favorable with caudal block than the spinal anesthesia.