Sprotte versus Quincke Spinal Needles on the Frequency of Spinal Anesthesia Success in Patients undergoing Cesarean Section Delivery

Background: In previous studies, the anesthesia technique was performed by different people and different results were reported, which makes comparisons difficult. Aim: This study aimed to compare Sprotte (Non-cutting) and Quincke (Cutting) spinal needles on the frequency of spinal anesthesia success in patients undergoing cesarean delivery. Method: This double-blind randomized clinical trial study was performed in 2019 on 100 pregnant women in ASA class I or II with term and single pregnancies who were candidates for elective cesarean section with spinal anesthesiain Tabriz Al-Zahra Hospital. Spinal anesthesia was performed using Sprotte spinal needle 25G in the intervention group (n=50) and with Quincke s spinal needle 25G in the control group (n=50). The frequency of spinal anesthesia failure was recorded as complete and partial failure. Data were analyzed using SPSS.16 software. P 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: In the Sprotte group, there was one patient with incomplete failure and two with complete failure; in the Quincke group, there were 2 patients with incomplete failure and 3 with complete failure; the two groups were not significantly different (P=0.749). Three patients in the Quincke group required repeated spinal block. The frequency of sensory (P=0.002) and motor (P=0.001) block for surgery was significantly higher in the Sprotte group. The Post-Dural puncture headache (PDPH) was significantly higher in the Quincke group (P=0.006). Implications for Practice: The Post-Dural puncture headache (PDPH) using Sprotte spinal needle was lower than using Quincke needle in patients with spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery