[Continuous spinal anesthesia vs. combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in emergency surgery. The combined spinal-epidural anesthesia technique does not offer an advantage of spinal anesthesia with a microcatheter].

Wilhelm S, Standl T.

Open source

DOI
10.1007/s001010050489
Published
1997-11-01
Container
Anaesthesist
Publisher
Not recorded
Open access
no

Credibility signals

limited evidence Score 43/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1007/s001010050489,
  title = {[Continuous spinal anesthesia vs. combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in emergency surgery. The combined spinal-epidural anesthesia technique does not offer an advantage of spinal anesthesia with a microcatheter].},
  author = {Wilhelm S and  Standl T.},
  year = {1997},
  journal = {Anaesthesist},
  doi = {10.1007/s001010050489},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s001010050489}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - [Continuous spinal anesthesia vs. combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in emergency surgery. The combined spinal-epidural anesthesia technique does not offer an advantage of spinal anesthesia with a microcatheter].
AU  - Wilhelm S
AU  -  Standl T.
PY  - 1997
JO  - Anaesthesist
DO  - 10.1007/s001010050489
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1007/s001010050489
ER  - 

APA

S, W., & T., S. (1997). [Continuous spinal anesthesia vs. combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in emergency surgery. The combined spinal-epidural anesthesia technique does not offer an advantage of spinal anesthesia with a microcatheter].. Anaesthesist. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001010050489

Source records