Are combined spinal-epidural catheters reliable?

The combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique can rapidly relieve labor pain. However, the location of the epidural catheter is initially uncertain. In an emergency, this untested catheter may fail to provide adequate anesthesia. This study compared the efficacy of catheters placed as a part of an epidural or needle-though-needle CSE technique in laboring women. Patients requesting pain relief received either epidural (n=601) or CSE (n=1061) analgesia. All patients had a 20 gauge, closed tip multi-holed polyamide catheter. (B. Braun Medical, Inc.) inserted 2-8 cm into the epidural space. Catheters were tested to rule out intrathecal and intravascular location. Then, epidural patients received 10-20 ml local anesthetic +/- opioid in divided doses. CSE patients received and infusion of 0.083% bupivacaine with opioid at 10-15 ml/h. Of the 1495 catheters that were adequately tested, those inserted as part of a CSE technique were more likely to produce bilateral sensory change and adequate analgesia than were those inserted without prior spinal analgesia (98.6% vs 98.2%, P<0.02). Stand-alone epidural catheters were more likely to produce neither sensory change nor analgesia than those inserted as part of CSE technique (1.3% vs 0.2%, P<0.02). The only catheters that failed completely and were not intravascular were stand-alone epidural catheters. In this clinical setting, catheters inserted as part of a CSE technique had a high probability of being in the epidural space and functioning appropriately.     

Sequential spinal epidural analgesia for pain relief in labour: an audit of 620 parturients

This investigation was designed to evaluate sequential spinal epidural analgesia with a needle through needle technique for pain relief in labour. The spinal injection was made using a Becton Dickinson 29 gauge Quincke point needle. Bupivacaine 1 mg, sufentanil 5 microg and adrenaline 25 microg (2 ml) were injected intrathecally. Analgesia was maintained using bupivacaine 12.5 mg, sufentanil 10 microg and adrenaline 12.5 microg in a 10 ml bolus given through an epidural catheter in the epidural space. This dosage was also used for the test dose. Pain relief was obtained in less than ten minutes and lasted for a mean of 134 min. Of the 620 parturients in the investigation, 500 had a mean dose of 4.3 mg bupivacaine per hour. Hypotension and paresis were of no concern. Patient satisfaction was excellent, 85% of the parturients being very satisfied and 10% satisfied.     

Effect of lateral position and volume on the spread of epidural anaesthesia in the parturient

The effect of lateral positioning and the volume of drug injected on the spread of epidural anaesthesia was assessed in 131 healthy parturients. Epidural injection for anaesthesia was done at the L3-4 interspace and a catheter was inserted into the epidural space after injection of the drug. The patients were randomly assigned to four groups. The doses used were 12 ml of bupivacaine 0.25 per cent and 6 ml of bupivacaine 0.5 percent. Patients were kept in the lateral position in which the block was done (Groups I and III) or turned to the opposite side after completion of the epidural injection (Groups II and IV). Sensory levels and maternal assessment of pain relief were determined fifteen to twenty minutes after injection. All assessments were done by a trained observer who did not know to what group the patient had been allocated. Maintenance of the lateral position after induction of epidural anaesthesia is compatible with satisfactory analgesia for labour. Twelve ml bupivacaine 0.25 per cent provides better analgesia than 6 ml bupivacaine 0.5 per cent although the same mass is injected. The quality of analgesia is improved by turning the patients to the contralateral side after injection of 12 ml bupivacaine 0.25 per cent.     

Continuous spinal analgesia or opioid-added continuous epidural analgesia for postoperative pain control after hip replacement

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Continuous spinal anaesthesia and continuous epidural anaesthesia are both able to provide adequate postoperative pain relief. Combining local anaesthetics and opioids results in synergistic effects. The purpose of this randomized, prospective study was to compare quality of analgesia, side-effects and patient's satisfaction between spinal bupivacaine alone and epidural bupivacaine with sufentanil postoperatively. METHODS: Fifty-nine patients scheduled for hip arthroplasty were randomly assigned either to Group 1 receiving continuous spinal anaesthesia or Group 2 receiving continuous epidural anaesthesia. Postoperatively, those in Group 1 received a 1 mL bolus followed by a continuous infusion of 10 mL/24 h of bupivacaine 0.25 %. Those in Group 2 received a 5 mL bolus of lidocaine 2%, followed by a continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% with sufentanil 0.001 mg mL(-1) at 4 mL h(-1). Pain was measured using a verbal rating score and a visual analogue scale. RESULTS: Group 1 and Group 2 of 43.3% and 37.9% reported complete analgesia on the verbal rating score. No statistically significant difference was found in the visual analogue scale. Nausea and vomiting occurred significantly more often in Group 2. The patient satisfaction rates did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous spinal analgesia with bupivacaine alone and continuous epidural analgesia with bupivacaine/sufentanil are both effective for postoperative pain relief after hip replacement. Those patients in the epidural group reported better analgesia but had a higher rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Efficacy of pain therapy did not correlate with patient satisfaction.     

Epidural administration of midazolam with saline or bupivacaine for postoperative pain]

Postoperative pain relief and sedation with epidural midazolam-saline or midazolam-bupivacaine were studied in 46 patients after elective upper abdominal surgery. They were divided into 6 groups. In each group, 10 ml saline, 10 ml saline+midazolam 0.05 mg.kg-1, 10 ml saline+midazolam 0.1 mg.kg-1 (saline group), 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml, 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml + midazolam 0.05 mg.kg-1 or 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml + midazolam 0.1 mg.kg-1 (bupivacaine group) was administered via epidural catheter for complaint of pain. For 120 minutes after epidural injection, blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), sedation score, and serum concentration of midazolam (conc midazolam) were evaluated. The time interval until next complaint of pain (pain relief time) was measured. In midazolam injected group, BP, HR, RR were not changed from preinjection value, but sufficient sedation was obtained and pain relief time was significantly prolonged compared with saline or bupivacaine injected group. Midazolam level was lower than that of sedation level. There were no significant differences between saline group and bupivacaine group, but the pain relief effect was slightly stronger in bupivacaine group. It is concluded that epidural saline - midazolam or 0.25% bupivacaine - midazolam is useful for postoperative pain relief after upper abdominal surgery.     

Postoperative analgesia following spondylodesis using a peridural catheter placed during surgery. Results of a pilot study

For the treatment of postoperative (p.o.) pain following vertebral surgery, systemic analgesics are frequently used in high doses with a variety of side effects. It was the aim of this study to investigate p.o. epidural catheter analgesia in 20 patients following surgical correction of scoliosis using the Cotrel and Dubousset technique. METHODS. The patients received balanced general anesthesia with fentanyl and isoflurane. At the end of the operation, before closing the fascia, an epidural catheter was placed by the orthopedic surgeon. After extubation and following evaluation of the motor function of all extremities. 6-10 ml bupivacaine 0.25% was injected into the epidural catheter followed by continuous administration of 0.25% bupivacaine 4-8 ml/h. Analgesic level and hemodynamic parameters were monitored. Pain was measured by the visual analogue scale. If analgesia was not sufficient, the patients received tramadol or piritramide intravenously. RESULTS. In 11 of 20 patients epidural analgesia was rated adequate; 5 needed additional systemic analgesics, and in 4 effective analgesia was not achieved with either epidural analgesia or systemic opioids. No complications were observed. DISCUSSION. The pilot study documented that epidural analgesia using an intraoperatively placed epidural catheter can be used for p.o. pain relief after vertebral surgery using the Cotrel and Dubousset technique. Additional studies will compare the method described to other pain-relieving procedures.     

Continuous spinal anaesthesia or continuous epidural anaesthesia for post-operative pain control after hip replacement?

Both continuous spinal anaesthesia and continuous epidural anaesthesia are supposed to provide adequate post-operative pain relief. The purpose of this randomized, prospective study was to compare the quality of analgesia, occurrence of side effects and patient satisfaction between spinal and epidural administration of bupivacaine during the first post-operative 72 h. One hundred and two patients scheduled for hip arthroplasty were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Group 1 received continuous spinal anaesthesia for intra-operative and post-operative management, Group 2 received continuous epidural anaesthesia. Immediately after surgery, the continuous spinal anaesthesia-group received a 1-mL bolus (bupivacaine 0.25%), followed by a continuous infusion of 10 mL over 24 h. The continuous epidural anaesthesia-group received a 10-mL bolus (bupivacaine 0.25%), followed by 2 mL h-1. The level of pain was gauged from a verbal rating score and from a visual analogue scale; the degree of motor blockade was recorded using the Bromage score. In the continuous spinal anaesthesia-group 90.2% reported complete analgesia on the verbal rating scale, but only 21.6% of the continuous epidural anaesthesia-group did. The visual analogue scale scores given by the continuous spinal anaesthesia-group were significantly lower than those of the continuous epidural anaesthesia-group. The percentage of patients with a motor block was significantly higher in the continuous spinal anaesthesia-group on the day of surgery and at the first post-operative day. During the first 24 h, nausea and vomiting occurred more often in the continuous epidural anaesthesia-group. The satisfaction was considered excellent in 92.2% of the continuous spinal anaesthesia-group and in 70.6% of the continuous epidural anaesthesia-group. It is concluded that continuous spinal anaesthesia and continuous epidural anaesthesia are effective and safe for post-operative pain relief after hip replacement. Compared with continuous epidural anaesthesia, continuous spinal anaesthesia provides faster onset of pain relief, ensures better analgesia and results in more satisfied patients.     

Prospective, randomized comparison of epidural and combined spinal epidural analgesia during labor.

The analgesic efficacy and incidence of maternal, fetal and neonatal side-effects of combined spinal epidural (CSE) and epidural (EPI) analgesia, using a mixture of bupivacaine 0.125%, epinephrine (1.25 micrograms.ml-1) and sufentanil (0.75 microgram.ml-1) for the relief of labor pain, were randomly and prospectively compared in 110 parturients. A 29 gauge Whitacre tip spinal needle was used to perforate the dura in CSE patients. Compared to EPI, CSE resulted in rapid (326 +/- 22 vs 766 +/- 79 sec, p < 0.05), excellent analgesia, using less bupivacaine (23.5 +/- 2.3 vs 33.9 +/- 2.9 mg, p < 0.05) and sufentanil (12.5 +/- 1.0 vs 16.5 +/- .7 micrograms, p < 0.05). A tendency to improved patient satisfaction in the CSE group was observed. The incidence of maternal or neonatal side effects was similar in both groups. No PDPH was observed. We conclude that CSE analgesia results in excellent pain relief during labor with immediate gratification as compared to epidural analgesia.     

Two in one: patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) to prevent erection and control pain in adult hypospadias-surgery patients.

Following penile surgery, erections are painful and may prejudice the result, because the sutures may not withstand a rigid erection. Therefore, prevention of erection and management of pain are extremely important following hypospadias repair, especially in adult patients. In this prospective study, we aimed to achieve these goals by using an epidural block with patient-controlled analgesia. We allocated 20 adult patients scheduled for hypospadias repair randomly either to receive or not to receive epidural analgesia. Postoperative pain was scored according to a standardised scoring system, based on a 10 point visual analogue scale. In group I (n = 10), analgesia was provided by a 3 ml h(-1) continuous infusion of fentanyl (2 microg) and bupivacaine solution (0.125%) in 1 ml saline via an epidural catheter for the first 3 days. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia was administered with an additional 5 ml of the same solution when the pain score was high (> 4). After 3 days, fentanyl was excluded from the treatment protocol, and analgesia was maintained with bupivacaine (0.125%). In group II (n = 10, control group), an epidural catheter was not inserted, and analgesia was maintained with pethidine (1 mg kg(-1)). Pain management was found to be more effective in group I. No erections occurred in group I, but the erection rate in group II was mean +/- s.d. = 1.7 +/- 0.2. The differences were found to be statistically significant (P<0.05). We highly recommend the technique described here, which offers efficient analgesia and control of erection in adult hypospadias patients.     

Continuous mandibular nerve block for pain relief. A report of two cases

PURPOSE: Mandibular nerve block allows surgery to be performed on the mandible. However, pain in the postoperative period needs to be treated with opioids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents which have undesirable side effects. We examine the feasibility of continuous mandibular nerve block with 0.25% bupivacaine top-ups using a catheter for intraoperative and postoperative pain relief in two patients with a fracture of the mandible. METHODS: Using the lateral extraoral approach, the mandibular nerve was approached with an 18-gauge indwelling iv cannula in two patients undergoing repair of a fractured mandible under general anesthesia. After removing the needle, an 18-gauge epidural catheter was inserted into the cannula which was then removed. The catheter was tunnelled subcutaneously to emerge at the lateral aspect of the forehead. Two to 4 mL bupivacaine 0.25% were injected on a 12-hr basis and the catheter was kept in place for seven days. RESULTS: Both patients had excellent pain relief and no parenteral or oral analgesics were required throughout the postoperative period. No side effects were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous mandibular nerve block with 2-4 mL 0.25% bupivacaine top-ups injected twice a day through a catheter provides excellent pain relief in patients with a fracture of the mandible. This method may have implications for the management of pain of other etiology in the mandibular region.     

Epidural blood flow and regression of sensory analgesia during continuous postoperative epidural infusion of bupivacaine

Epidural blood flow was measured in seven patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery during combined lumbar epidural and general anesthesia. After an initial dose of 20 ml plain bupivacaine 0.5%, a continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine 0.5% (8 ml/hr) was given for 16 hours for postoperative pain relief. The epidural blood flow was measured by a local 133Xe clearance technique in which 15-35 MBq 133Xe diluted in 1 ml saline was injected through the epidural catheter on the day before surgery (no bupivacaine), 30 minutes after the initial dose of bupivacaine on the morning before surgery, and 8, 12, and 16 hours later during the continuous infusion. Initial blood flow was 6.0 +/- 0.7 ml/min per 100 g tissue (mean +/- SEM). After epidural bupivacaine, blood flow increased in all seven patients to 7.4 +/- 0.7 ml (P less than 0.02). Initial level of sensory analgesia was T4.5 +/- 0.17 (mean +/- SEM). Postoperatively, two patients maintained the initial level of sensory analgesia and low pain score throughout the 16-hour study. In these two patients epidural blood flow remained constant after the initial increase. Flow increased further to 10.3 +/- 0.8 ml/min per 100 g tissue (P less than 0.03) in the other five patients as the level of sensory analgesia regressed postoperatively. These data suggest that changes in epidural blood flow during continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine, and thus changes in rates of vascular absorption of bupivacaine from the epidural space, may be an important factor contributing to differences in rates of regression of sensory analgesia.     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia in labour--is a continuous infusion of benefit?

A randomised, single-blind study was conducted among 52 gravida in active labour, to investigate two variants of patient-controlled epidural analgesia--bolus only versus bolus plus infusion. Patient-controlled analgesia variables, using an epidural solution of 0.125% bupivacaine plus fentanyl 3 mcg per ml, were a 4 ml incremental bolus with 15 minute lockout, plus or minus a 4 ml per hour infusion. Up to three additional staff-administered supplements of 0.5% bupivacaine 4 ml (20 mg) were allowed. There was no significant difference between groups with respect to pain relief, supplementary boluses required, satisfaction, side-effects or details of patient-controlled epidural analgesia, with the exception of greater fentanyl usage in the bolus plus infusion group (P less than 0.003). Both groups had high quality analgesia, low rates of bupivacaine usage and were highly satisfied. However, under the conditions of the study, the addition of a continuous background infusion to self-administration conferred no benefit.     

Treatment of Incomplete Analgesia after Placement of an Epidural Catheter and Administration of Local Anesthetic for Women in Labor

Background: Approximately 15% of women still have pain after placement of an epidural catheter and administration of local anesthetic for labor analgesia. Two techniques frequently used to treat this pain were compared: (1) withdrawal of the catheter 1 cm and repeated dosing with additional local anesthetic, and (2) repeated dosing with additional local anesthetic without any catheter manipulation.

Methods: Fifteen minutes after placement of a multiple-orifice epidural catheter 5 cm into the epidural space and administration of 13 ml 0.25% bupivacaine to the parturient in labor, the adequacy of analgesia was assessed. All women who had incomplete analgesia were randomized (first intervention) to receive and additional 5 ml 0.25% bupivacaine (local-anesthetic-only only group) or to receive 5 ml 0.25% bupivacaine after first withdrawing the epidural catheter 1 cm (catheter-manipulation group). If after 15 min the woman still bad pain, then (second intervention) the catheter was withdrawn 1 cm and an additional 5 ml 0.25% bupivacaine was administered to the local-anesthetic-only group, whereas 5 ml 0.25% bupivacaine was given to the catheter-manipulation group without further catheter manipulation. The success rate of the second intervention was assessed 15 min later.

Results: Seventy-eight women were enrolled in the study, 39 to each group. In the local-anesthetic-only group, 29 (74%) women were successfully treated with the first intervention and remaining 10 (100%) were successfully treated with the second intervention. In the catheter-manipulation group, 30 (77%) were successfully treated with the first intervention and 7 (100%; 2 patients were not studied because of investigator error) were successfully treated with the second intervention (P = NS).     

An analysis of postoperative epidural analgesia failure by computed tomography epidurography

In this prospective study involving 125 patients, we analyzed epidural analgesia failure after major abdominal surgery using computed tomography (CT) epidurographies to compare the incidence of dislodgement of epidural catheters and leakage of solution from the epidural space between two groups of patients: patients with successful or failed epidural analgesia. Our hypothesis was that the incidence of dislodgement and leakage should be low when epidural analgesia is successful. A thoracic epidural catheter was inserted before general anesthesia and secured by subcutaneous tunneling. Bupivacaine (0.25%) was administered during surgery followed by continuous epidural analgesia with 0.125% bupivacaine (10 mL/h) and morphine (0.25 mg/h) for 48 h. Failure was defined as a visual analog scale pain score at rest more than 30 mm and/or interruption of epidural analgesia before 48 h for any reason. When failure was not due to unintentionally withdrawn, kinked catheters or adverse events (n = 11), a CT scan with contrast injection was performed. Control CT scans were also performed in patients with adequate analgesia (i.e., the success group). The incidence of failure was 24.8% (n = 31). CT scans in the failure group (n = 20) showed seven patients with catheters outside the epidural space, nine with normal distribution, one with unilateral spread, and three with leakage of solution outside the epidural space. In the success group, CT scans (n = 19) showed 11 patients with normal distribution, five with unilateral spread, and three with leakage. We conclude that the major cause of epidural analgesia failure was dislodgment of the catheter. CT scans were mostly useful for detecting leakage of injectate, which may be the early phase of dislodgment.     

Myelopathy with syringomyelia following thoracic epidural anaesthesia

Under general anaesthesia and muscle relaxation, a thoracic epidural catheter was inserted at the T8-T9 level in a 7-year-old boy scheduled to have a Nissen fundoplication to provide postoperative analgesia. After 4 ml of lignocaine 1.5% was injected through the catheter, hypotension resulted. Fifty-five minutes later 5 ml of bupivacaine 0.25% produced the same effect. In the recovery room a similar injection resulted in lower blood pressure and temporary apnoea. Sensory and motor deficits were noted the next day and four days later magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated spinal cord syringomyelia extending from T5 to T10. Four years later, dysaesthesia from T6 to T10 weakness of the left lower extremity and bladder and bowel dysfunction persist. The risks of inserting thoracic epidural catheters in patients under general anaesthesia and muscle relaxation are discussed, emphasising the possibility of spinal cord injury with disastrous consequences.     

High quality labour analgesia using small gauge epidural needles and catheters

PURPOSE: Inadvertent epidural needle punctures represent the leading cause of severe postdural puncture headache (PDPH) in parturients. Use of small gauge (G) epidural needles for continuous analgesia has received little attention despite possible important reductions in PDPH. We report the first study to examine the feasibility of using small G Tuohy needles and 23 G catheters for labour analgesia. METHODS: Healthy parturients 30 min), recognized dural puncture, PDPH, patient assessment of analgesia within 24 hr of delivery, complications and anesthesiologist satisfaction. RESULTS: Twenty-seven parturients were recruited. Successful blocks were initiated and maintained in 24/27 who rated overall analgesia from good to excellent (19/24 very good to excellent). Three block failures occurred at the initiation phase only (two unilateral, one absent). There was no evidence of catheter kinking after placement. One patient developed PDPH after unrecognized dural puncture which was self-treated with acetaminophen for four days, followed by complete symptom resolution. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to provide high quality labour analgesia using small G epidural needles and catheters. The effect of small G epidural needles on PDPH warrants future study.     

Cerebrospinal norepinephrine concentrations and the duration of epidural analgesia

This study was performed to determine whether the addition of norepinephrine to local anaesthetics prolongs epidural analgesia in man. In addition, cerebrospinal fluid norepinephrine (NE) concentrations were measured. In the first part of the study, epidural catheters were inserted in 14 patients before herniotomy. Mepivacaine, 1.5 per cent (0.35 ml.kg-1), was administered and norepinephrine (5 micrograms.ml-1) was added in seven patients. The duration of anaesthesia was prolonged from 54 +/- 11 min to 83 +/- 12 min (P less than 0.05) and CSF NE concentrations increased from 68 +/- 12 pg.ml-1 to 336 +/- 85 pg.ml-1 in the NE group (P less than 0.01). In the second part, eight patients with herpetic neuralgia received epidural analgesia at the fourth to eighth thoracic interspace, using bupivacaine 0.25 per cent, with and without NE. The CSF NE concentrations in this group were greater than in the surgical patients before operation and increased from 254 +/- 58 to 406 +/- 58 pg.ml-1 30 min after administration of bupivacaine with NE. The duration of pain relief was prolonged with NE. These results suggest that adding NE to local anaesthetics prolongs epidural analgesia. Moreover, NE concentrations in surgical patients increased to levels similar to those found in patients suffering from herpetic analgesia. This suggests that the increase of CSF NE in chronic pain states has an antinociceptive effect.     

Epidural anesthesia in a patient with myasthenia gravis

We present a patient with myasthenia gravis who was safely managed by epidural anesthesia during and after thymectomy. An epidural catheter was inserted via the C7-T1 intervertebral space and 2% lidocaine was used during the surgery. The level of analgesia as determined by pinprick extending from C5 to T6. Epidural morphine or morphine and bupivacaine were used for postoperative pain relief. We evaluated ventilatory responses to CO₂ and hypoxia after epidural anesthesia with lidocaine or morphine, and during continuous epidural infusion of the mixture of morphine and bupivacaine. Ventilatory responses to CO₂ and hypoxia were both depressed following epidural injection of morphine. However, depression of ventilatory responses was not demonstrated following continuous epidural infusion of a mixture of morphine and bupivacaine. This case report suggests that epidural anesthesia is useful as a primary anesthetic and for postoperative pain control in patients with myasthenia gravis.     

Repeated failure of epidural analgesia: an association with epidural fat?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To report the case of a patient who experienced repeated failed epidural analgesia associated with an unusual amount of fat in the epidural space (epidural lipomatosis). CASE REPORT: A 44-year-old female presented for an elective small bowel resection. An L(1-2) epidural catheter was placed for postoperative analgesia. The patient gave no indication of having pain at the time of emergence from general anesthesia or in the first 2 hours in the recovery room. Assessment of the level of hypoesthesia to ice while the patient was comfortable in the recovery room suggested a functional epidural catheter (cephalad level of T(10)). Two hours after admission to the recovery room the patient began to complain of increasing pain. Another 6 mL 0.25% bupivacaine was administered via the catheter. The patient's pain decreased, but remained substantial, and there was minimal evidence of sensory block above the T(10) level. Subsequently, a T(10) epidural catheter was placed. Testing confirmed proper placement of the catheter in the epidural space at the T(10) level. A test dose of 5 mL 0.25% bupivacaine resulted in prompt and complete relief of the patient's pain. However, the level of hypoesthesia to ice did not exceed the T(10) level. Approximately 1 hour later the patient complained of increasing discomfort again. There was no evidence of any sensory block, and there was no response to a bolus of 8 mL 1% lidocaine. A thorough examination of the patient did not suggest any cause for the pain other than a malfunctioning epidural catheter. A third epidural catheter was placed at the T(8-9) level. This catheter was again confirmed to be in the epidural space with a test dose of 10 mL 0.5% bupivacaine. The level of hypoesthesia to ice was restricted to a narrow bilateral band from T(7)-T(9). Analgesia failed 2 hours later. The epidural catheter was removed and the patient's pain was subsequently managed with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) morphine. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan revealed extensive epidural fat dorsal to the spinal cord from C(5)-C(7) and from T(3)-T(9). An imaging diagnosis of asymptomatic epidural lipomatosis was established. CONCLUSION: We have described a case of repeated failure of epidural analgesia in a patient with epidural lipomatosis.