Search

Introduction: This observational study was designed to assess the use of spinal anesthesia with chloroprocaine in the context of ambulatory surgery., Methods: A prospective, multicenter, observational study was carried out among 33 private or public centers between May 2014 and January 2015 and adult patients, scheduled for a short ambulatory surgery under spinal anesthesia with chloroprocaine. The primary outcomes were anesthetic effectiveness, defined as performance of the whole surgical procedure without any additional anesthetic agent, and the time to achieve eligibility for hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes were the effect of chloroprocaine on motor and sensory blocks, patients' satisfaction, and the use of analgesics in the first 24 h after surgery., Results: Among the 615 enrolled patients, 56% were male, the mean age was 47.2 ± 15.2 years, and most patients had an ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) status of 1 (63.7%). Main surgical procedures performed were orthopedic (62.6%) and gynecologic (16.1%), and the mean duration of surgery was 26.7 ± 16.7 min. The overall anesthetic success rate was 93.8% (95% CI [91.5%; 95.6%]) for the 580 patients with available data for primary criteria. The failure rate was lower than 7% for all surgical procedures, except for gynecologic surgery (14.8%; 95% CI [8.1%; 23.9%]). The average times of eligibility for hospital discharge and effective discharge were 252.7 ± 82.7 min and 313.8 ± 109.9 min, respectively. The time of eligibility for hospital discharge is defined as the recovery of the patient's normal clinical parameters and the time of effective discharge is defined as the time for the patient to leave the hospital after surgery. Eligibility for patient's discharge was achieved more rapidly in private than public hospitals (236.3 ± 77.2 min vs. 280.9 ± 80.7 min, respectively, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: This study showed positive results on the effectiveness of chloroprocaine as a short-duration anesthetic and could be used to reduce the time to achieve eligibility for hospital discharge., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02152293. Registered on May 6, 2014. Date of enrollment of the first participant in the trial May 7, 2014.

Introduction: Available short-acting intrathecal anesthetic agents (chloroprocaine and prilocaine) offer an alternative to general anesthesia for short-duration surgical procedures, especially ambulatory surgeries. Factors determining the choice of anesthesia for short-duration procedures have not been previously identified., Methods: This observational, prospective, multicenter, cohort study was conducted between July 2015 and July 2016, in 33 private or public hospitals performing ambulatory surgery. The primary objective was to determine the factors influencing the choice of anesthetic technique (spinal or general anesthesia). Secondary outcomes included efficacy of the anesthesia, time to hospital discharge, and patient satisfaction., Results: Among 592 patients enrolled, 309 received spinal anesthesia and 283 underwent general anesthesia. In both study arms, the most frequently performed surgical procedures were orthopedic and urologic (43.3% and 30.7%, respectively); 66.1% of patients were free to choose their type of anesthesia, 21.8% chose one of the techniques because they were afraid of the other, 16.8% based their choice on the expected ease of recovery, 19.2% considered their degree of anxiety/stress, and 16.9% chose the technique on the basis of its efficacy. The median times to micturition and to unassisted ambulation were significantly shorter in the general anesthesia arm compared with the spinal anesthesia arm (225.5 [98; 560] min vs. 259.0 [109; 789] min; p = 0.0011 and 215.0 [30; 545] min vs. 240.0 [40; 1420]; p = 0.0115, respectively). The median time to hospital discharge was equivalent in both study arms. In the spinal anesthesia arm, patients who received chloroprocaine and prilocaine recovered faster than patients who received bupivacaine. The time to ambulation and the time to hospital discharge were shorter (p < 0.001). The overall success rate of spinal anesthesia was 91.6%, and no significant difference was observed between chloroprocaine, prilocaine, and bupivacaine. The patients' global satisfaction with anesthesia and surgery was over 90% in both study arms., Conclusions: Patient's choice, patient fear of the alternative technique, patient stress/anxiety, the expected ease of recovery, and the efficacy of the technique were identified as the main factors influencing patient choice of short-acting local anesthesia or general anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia with short-acting local anesthetics was preferred to general anesthesia in ambulatory surgeries and was associated with a high degree of patient satisfaction., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02529501. Registered on June 23, 2015. Date of enrollment of the first participant July 21, 2015.

Background: Spinal bupivacaine is used for day-case surgery but the appropriate dose that guarantees hospital discharge is unknown., Objective: We sought to determine the spinal bupivacaine dose that prevents delayed hospital discharge in ambulatory surgery., Design: Systematic review of clinical trials., Data Sources: Comprehensive search in electronic databases of studies published between 1996 and 2014 reporting the use of spinal bupivacaine in ambulatory patients. Additional articles were retrieved through hyperlinks and by manually searching reference lists in original articles, review articles and correspondence published in English and French., Main Outcome Measures: Data were used to calculate, motor block duration and discharge time, an estimated maximal effect (Emax: maximum theoretical time of motor block) and the effective dose to obtain half of Emax (D50) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A simulation was performed to determine the dose corresponding to a time to recovery of 300 min for motor function, and 360 min for discharge, in 95% of the patients., Results: In total, 23 studies (1062 patients) were included for analysis of the time to recovery of motor function, and 12 studies (618 patients) for the time to hospital discharge. The Emax for recovery of motor function was 268 min [95% CI (189 to 433 min)] and the D50 was 3.9 mg [95% CI (2.3 to 6.2 mg)]. A 7.5-mg dose of bupivacaine enables resolution of motor block and ambulation within 300 min in 95% of the patients. A 5-mg dose or less was associated with an unacceptable failure rate., Conclusion: Ambulatory surgery is possible under spinal anaesthesia with bupivacaine although the dose range that ensures reliable anaesthesia with duration short enough to guarantee ambulatory management is narrow.

Objectives: To assess pain intensity and quality of postoperative recovery in patients given fast-track anesthesia and spinal analgesia versus patients treated with standard anesthesia., Design: A prospective, randomized, controlled study., Setting: A private institution., Participants: Eighty-three patients who underwent cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass were analyzed., Interventions: General anesthesia consisted of remifentanil and spinal analgesia (low-dose morphine and clonidine) for the fast-track group (FTG) and sufentanil without spinal analgesia for the control group (CG). During the postoperative period, paracetamol and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCA) with morphine were given., Measurements and Main Results: Postoperative pain intensity was evaluated during 48 hours with visual analog scale scores and intravenous morphine consumption. Pain impact on quality of life was assessed with the brief pain inventory (BPI) score (days 1-8), and recovery was evaluated with the quality of recovery score (QoR-40, day 4). Compared with the CG, FTG pain intensity was significantly lower 0 to 4 (p < 0.01) and 6 to 12 hours (p < 0.05) after surgery, as was their cumulative intravenous PCA morphine consumption (p = 0.01). BPI scores supported that FTG patients had significantly (p < 0.01) less "pain at its worst" on days 1 and 2, their BPI-assessed pain interfered significantly less with daily life on day 1 (p < 0.001), and their global QoR-40 score (day 4) was significantly higher (p < 0.05)., Conclusions: Fast-track anesthesia combined with morphine-clonidine spinal analgesia controlled postoperative pain better and obtained a better QoR than conventional analgesia.

Objective: Effective postoperative analgesia is a critical part of fast-track cardiac surgery. This study compared the postoperative analgesic effect of fast-track anesthesia with remifentanil and spinal morphine and clonidine with that of sufentanil anesthesia followed by patient-controlled administration of intravenous morphine., Design: Prospective, blinded, randomized study., Setting: Single private institution., Participants: Forty patients selected for coronary artery bypass graft surgery allocated randomly into 2 groups., Interventions: General anesthesia was performed with etomidate, isoflurane, cisatracurium, and either remifentanil (0.10-0.25 microg/kg/min) or sufentanil (up to 3.5 microg/kg). In the remifentanil group, patients received spinal morphine (4 microg/kg) and clonidine (1 microg/kg) before induction. Postoperatively, patients in both groups were connected to an intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) morphine pump that delivered a 1-g bolus with a 7-minute lockout interval., Measurements and Main Results: Patients were evaluated for pain on a visual analog scale (VAS), at rest and on deep breathing, and for intravenous PCA morphine consumption during 24 hours. The intravenous PCA morphine 24-hour cumulative dose was lower in the fast-track than in the control group (15.8+/-12.6 v 32.7+/-22.3 mg, p<0.05). Before extubation, VAS scores were higher in the fast-track group, but after they were lower both at rest and during deep breathing. Extubation delay was shorter in the fast-track group (156.5+/-46.1 v 272+/-116.4 minutes, p<0.05)., Conclusion: The combination of anesthesia with remifentanil and spinal analgesia with morphine and clonidine produces effective analgesia after coronary artery surgery and a rapid extubation time.

We have investigated the relationship between the extent of spinal block and occurrence of sedation. In a first series of 43 patients, the distribution of sedation score (measured on the Ramsey scale) was related to the extent of spinal block (pinprick). In a second series of 33 patients, the relationship between sedation score and spinal block persisted after injection of midazolam 1 mg. This study confirmed that high spinal block was associated with increased sedation.

We report a case of total spinal anaesthesia which occurred after a lumbar plexus block using a posterior approach. After total hip arthroplasty under general anaesthesia, a lumbar plexus block was performed according to Winnie's landmarks at the L4 interspace using a nerve stimulator. Aspiration test for blood and spinal fluid were both negative, as well as a test dose of 3 mL lidocaine 2%-bupivacaine 0.5%. One minute after the injection of 27 mL of the same mixture, a complete anaesthetic block occurred with hypotension and loss of consciousness requiring intubation and controlled ventilation during 3h30, without sequelae. Lumbar plexus block using a posterior approach must be performed cautiously and a slow and fractionated injection of the full dose is recommended.

Background and Objectives: The potential risks of spinal lidocaine have generated interest in an alternative local anesthetic solution. Features of anesthetic block were therefore assessed in a double-blind randomized prospective study following administration of spinal bupivacaine in small doses., Methods: Ninety patients scheduled for lower limb saphenous vein stripping were randomized to receive a 4-mL hyperbaric solution containing 4, 6, or 8 mg bupivacaine in the subarachnoid space. Sensory and motor block and hemodynamic changes were assessed at regular intervals. Patients were also questioned regarding transient radicular irritation symptoms., Results: The mean duration of sensory block increased with increasing dose (duration at L2: 56 +/- 27, 71 +/- 29, 79 +/- 25 minutes in groups 4, 6, and 8 mg, respectively, P < .05). Motor block was also dose dependent. The incidence of grade 3 motor block increased from 0%, to 21%, and to 53%. No patient had symptoms of transient radicular irritation. Arterial pressure and heart rate were stable throughout the study., Conclusion: Hyperbaric bupivacaine 6-8 mg provides a suitable alternative to spinal lidocaine for surgical procedures of short duration.

We have conducted a double-blind, randomized study in two groups of 20 patients each, undergoing hip surgery during spinal anaesthesia, to compare the incidence of urinary retention after spinal morphine or clonidine. Patients received 0.5% spinal bupivacaine 15 mg combined with either clonidine 75 micrograms or morphine 0.2 mg. After operation, patients were examined for micturition, bladder distension, or both; when they failed to void, they received naloxone 0.2 mg, and if bladder distension persisted, a catheter was inserted. At 12 h, all patients in the morphine group but only five in the clonidine group had bladder distension, and at 24 h this was present in seven and one patient in the morphine and clonidine groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Naloxone was given in 16 and one, and a catheter was placed in one and six patients in the morphine and clonidine groups, respectively (P < 0.001). We conclude that spinal clonidine impaired bladder function to a lesser extent than morphine.

Background and Objectives: Meperidine is an opioid with local anesthetic properties that produces spinal anesthesia after subarachnoid injection for surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical relevance of spinal meperidine for cesarean delivery., Methods: Twenty-eight ASA I-III parturients scheduled for cesarean delivery were included in the study. Meperidine 1 mg/kg was administered subarachnoid. Patients were monitored for appropriate anesthesia and side effects., Results: Cesarean delivery was successfully performed under spinal meperidine in 22 cases: two cases required general anesthesia before incision and the duration of sensory anesthesia was too short in four cases. Side effects included moderate hypotension (decrease in arterial blood pressure > 30 mm Hg in 36% of the cases), nausea (32%), and pruritus (10.7%). No respiratory depression was documented in mothers and newborns., Conclusions: Although short-acting, meperidine can be used as a substitute for local anesthetics for cesarean delivery, especially when local anesthetics are not available.

Objective: To determine whether leaving an intrathecal catheter in place in the postoperative period prevents postdural puncture headache (PDPH)., Methods: Lumbar puncture was performed with an 18-gauge Tuohy needle. 0.5% bupivacaine spinal anesthesia was given through a 20-gauge catheter in 87 patients having orthopedic surgery. Postoperatively, patients were allocated randomly to have the catheter immediately withdrawn (group 1, N = 47) or kept in place for 12 to 24 hours (group 2, N = 40). Patients were questioned by a blinded observer, about PDPH twice a day on postoperative days 1, 2, 3, and 8., Results: The incidence of PDPH was 9.2%, and this was comparable in the two groups (5 patients in group 1 and 3 patients in group 2)., Conclusion: Leaving the intrathecal catheter in place in the postoperative period for 12 to 24 hours does not prevent PDPH.

Two cases are reported of patients with phantom limb pain after lower limb amputation and requiring surgery of their stump. The stumps were revised and the remaining femoral shaft shortened. Both had spinal anaesthesia for this procedure, with an association of bupivacaine and 150 micrograms of clonidine. In one patient, the phantom pain did not resume for one month, and in the other for three days. The return of pain was preceded by the sensation of a phantom limb. These cases suggest that alpha 2 adrenergic agonists could play a major part in the treatment of phantom limb pain.

ASA II-III patients, scheduled for peripheral vascular surgery, were included in a study designed to assess the effect of spinal epinephrine and clonidine on plasma concentrations of spinally administered 0.5% glucose-free bupivacaine. Patients were allocated randomly to three groups to receive via a spinal catheter 22.5 mg (4.5 ml) of bupivacaine alone (Group B, 9 patients) or combined with 0.3 mg epinephrine (Group BE, 10 patients) or 0.15 mg clonidine (Group BC, 10 patients). Sensory blockade was assessed by pin-prick and motor blockade on the Bromage scale. Bupivacaine plasma concentrations were measured by gas chromatography. A trend to prolongation of local anaesthetic blockade was documented in patients receiving bupivacaine plus epinephrine or clonidine. (Time to regression of sensory blockade to L2: 170 +/- 75 min in Group B, 230 +/- 50 min in Group BE, 232 +/- 64 min in Group BC.) The maximum peak concentration (Cmax), the time to reach Cmax (Tmax) and the time-concentration curve from 0-180 min (AUC) were not different for the three groups (Cmax 228 +/- 112 ng.ml-1 in Group B, 215 +/- 103 ng.ml-1 in Group BE, 234 +/- 159 ng.ml-1 in Group BC; Tmax 41 +/- 34 min in Group B, 59 +/- 31 min in Group BE, 68 +/- 32 min in Group BC; AUC 31.0 +/- 1.7 mg.ml-1.min-1 in Group B, 27.3 +/- 1.1 mg.ml-1.min-1 in Group BE, 27.0 +/- 1.1 mg.ml-1.min-1 in Group BC). The results of this study suggest that epinephrine and clonidine do not decrease blood resorption of spinal bupivacaine.

The aim of this study was to determine whether the addition of a small dose of prilocaine could augment the spinal block induced by meperidine and affect intrathecal meperidine pharmacokinetic behaviour. Spinal anaesthesia was performed in 60 men scheduled for endoscopic resection of a prostatic adenoma or bladder tumour under spinal anaesthesia. They were allocated randomly to receive either 1 mg.kg-1 meperidine (Group 1, n = 30), or 1 mg.kg-1 meperidine plus 0.5 mg.kg-1 prilocaine (Group 2, n = 30). Blood samples were collected prior to and for 24 hr after spinal injection in 24 patients (12 in each group). Plasma meperidine levels were assayed by gas chromatography. Complete motor block was achieved in all Group 2 patients, but was incomplete in seven of Group 1 (P less than 0.05). The onset of both motor and sensory blocks was shorter (P less than 0.01) in Group 2 and the duration was longer (P less than 0.05). Coadministration of prilocaine modifies meperidine pharmacokinetic behaviour. The area under curve was 48% greater (P less than 0.01) and Cmax was higher in Group 2 than in Group 1, 145.8 +/- 42.2 vs 107 +/- 20.5 ng.ml-1 (P less than 0.001). No evidence of respiratory depression was noted in any of the patients. Despite the increase in plasma meperidine concentrations, no side effects were observed. The plasma concentrations remained at one third to one sixth the levels reported to induce a respiratory depression. It is concluded that the addition of prilocaine to meperidine improves motor and sensory block during surgery and alters meperidine kinetics without producing major side effects.

Twenty-one patients were included in a randomized study to receive either 10 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine alone or combined with 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 or 0.5 mg.kg-1 meperidine for spinal anaesthesia. Sensory blockade was assessed by pin prick, motor blockade by the Bromage scale, and postoperative analgesia by VAS scores and by the time before the first demand for analgesia. Spinal meperidine did not change the duration of sensory blockade, but induced a dose-related increase in postoperative efficient analgesia. Spinal meperidine might be considered as a means to obtain postoperative analgesia in the hours immediately following surgery.

This study is a retrospective analysis of 303 consecutive spinal anaesthesia performed in orthopaedic patients of a University Hospital between January and December 1990. Failure of spinal anaesthesia was defined as the requirement for general anaesthesia to perform surgery. The parameters studied as possible risk factors of failure were patients demographics, local anaesthetic agents and solutions and techniques of spinal anaesthesia (single injection versus continuous spinal anaesthesia). Failures were related to inadequate or incomplete extension of sensory blockade or to difficulties to perform spinal injection. Continuous spinal anaesthesia was performed in 209 patients mostly with 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine, while 94 patients received a single injection of either hyperbaric 0.5% tetracaine with adrenaline or 0.5% bupivacaine or 5% lidocaine. Failures occurred in 6.3% of the cases but were significantly less frequent with continuous spinal anaesthesia (4.8%) than with the conventional technique (9.6%). The incidence of failure was higher with hyperbaric tetracaine (11.1%) confirming its poor reliability. Inadequate extension of the anaesthetic block was the main cause of failure whatever the spinal anaesthetic technique. These results point out the reliability of continuous spinal anaesthesia but problems may occasionally occur due to spinal catheter misplacement.

This study was designed to determine whether clonidine has analgesic properties, decreases the minimum alveolar concentration of inhalational anesthetics, or affects the quality and the duration of spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine. The comparative effects of oral and subarachnoid clonidine on spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine were studied in 36 patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery. Patients were allocated randomly into four groups to receive either oral diazepam (10 mg in Groups I and II) or oral clonidine (150 micrograms and 300 micrograms in Groups III and IV, respectively), as premedication. Spinal anesthesia was performed with 15 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% plus either 1 ml isotonic saline in Groups I, III, and IV, or 150 micrograms clonidine in Group II. Subarachnoid but not oral clonidine significantly prolonged the duration of sensory block (time for regression to L2 was 157 +/- 21 minutes in Group I and 267 +/- 75 minutes in Group II) and the duration of motor block (duration of Grade 3 motor block--Bromage scale--was 103 +/- 20 minutes in Group I and 175 +/- 68 minutes in Group II). Only the subarachnoid administration of clonidine achieves adequate concentrations to significantly increase the duration of spinal anesthesia.

A study was carried out to find out whether dividing the dose of local anaesthetic would give a better control of the spread and duration of sensory blockade due to spinal anaesthesia. It was carried out in 34 patients (mean age 62 years) scheduled for elective limb vascular surgery. All were classed ASA 2 or 3. Sensory blockade was assessed using a fine needle, and the degree of motor blockade with Bromage's scale. This was carried out every 5 min for the first 30 min, and thereafter, every 15 min until recovery from anaesthesia was complete. In the first group of patients (n = 16), spinal anaesthesia was obtained with a 26 gauge needle, the patient lying on his side; 4 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine were injected (1 ml every 10 seconds) before putting the patient supine. In the second group (n = 18), the catheter for continuous spinal anaesthesia was set up with the patient in the same position as for the first group. Once a length of 1 cm had been introduced in the subarachnoid space, the patient was placed supine and 2 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine were injected. If 15 min later sensory blockade did not reach T10, further 0.5 ml aliquots were given every 10 min so as to obtain a level of sensory blockade between T9 and T11. Maximum extension of sensory blockade was 15.1 +/- 2.3 metamers in group 1, with an extension to T3 in 2 patients. In group 2, 12.9 +/- 3.1 mg bupivacaine anaesthetized 14.2 +/- 1.9 metamers.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The extent and duration of sympathetic and sensory blockade were compared in 13 patients after spinal anaesthesia with 0.5% tetracaine (20 mg) in either isobaric (n = 6) or hyperbaric solution (n = 7). Sensory blockade was assessed by pin-prick and sympathetic blockade by the sympathogalvanometric method respectively at L5/S1, L2, T8 and C8/T1 levels. The time to onset and the duration of sensory or sympathetic blockade was identical. The mean extent of sympathetic blockade was 6 segments greater than that of sensory blockade. Hypotension was related to the extent of sensory but not sympathetic blockade. This study confirms that sympathetic blockade is more extended than sensory blockade during spinal anesthesia but does not allow to predict the occurrence of hypotension.

There is little data concerning failures in spinal anaesthesia. A retrospective analysis of 337 spinal anaesthesias performed in a teaching hospital gave a 9.8% failure rate. A failure was defined as the need to carry out part or all of a surgical act under general anaesthesia when spinal anaesthesia had been carried out. The main causes of failure were insufficiently or excessively extended neural blockade, insufficient duration or a poor quality sensory blockade with the patient feeling surgical or tourniquet pain. The local anaesthetics used were hyperbaric 0.5% tetracaine with and without 0.1 mg metaraminol, hyperbaric 0.5% prilocaine and isobaric 0.5% bupivacaine. The failure rate was 19.4% with plain hyperbaric tetracaine, 7.6% with tetracaine with metaraminol, 5% with prilocaine and 2.9% with isobaric bupivacaine. This rate was related neither to the experience of the anaesthetist, nor to the clinical features of the patients, nor to the position nor to the needle size. Although there were more failures during orthopaedic procedures, probably because of tourniquet pain, this was not significant. These results confirmed that spinal anaesthesia was a reliable technique. Hyperbaric plain tetracaine did not always guarantee a successful anaesthesia and isobaric bupivacaine should be more commonly used.

The effect of clonidine, an alpha 2 agonist, on sensory and motor blockade during spinal anesthesia was studied in 44 ASA physical status I II patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery. The patients were randomly allocated into three groups given 15 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric tetracaine (HT), within group I (N = 14) 1 ml isotonic saline, in group II (N = 15) 0.5 ml saline solution and 0.5 ml clonidine (75 micrograms), and in group III (N = 15) 1 ml clonidine (150 micrograms). Sensory blockade (SB) was evaluated by pinprick and motor blockade (MB) according to Bromage's scale. The level of SB was comparable in the three groups but the duration was different. The 75 micrograms clonidine was associated with 25% prolongation of SB at L2 and 29% prolongation of grade 3 MB Clonidine 150 micrograms prolonged the time of SB at L2 by 72% and grade 3 MB by 96%. Colloid infusion and the decrease in diastolic blood pressure were significantly greater in the clonidine 150 micrograms group compared to group I. A dose related prolongation of spinal anesthesia is demonstrated with clonidine.

In order to assess the effect of spinal clonidine on tourniquet pain, 30 patients scheduled to undergo orthopaedic surgery under spinal anaesthesia were allocated randomly to two groups. Patients in group I (n = 15) received 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine 15 mg plus isotonic saline 1 ml. Patients in group II (n = 15) received 0.5% bupivacaine 15 mg plus clonidine 1 ml (150 micrograms). Sensory block was evaluated by pinprick and motor block with Bromage's scale. The presence of clonidine significantly prolonged the duration of sensory and motor block. Three patients in group I, but none in group II, experienced tourniquet pain. Hypotension and bradycardia were not worsened by spinal clonidine. The use of clonidine may be a useful technique to augment bupivacaine spinal block.