A Comparative Evaluation of Hyperbaric Ropivacaine 0.5% (18mg) versus Hyperbaric Bupivacaine 0.5% (18mg) for Elective Lower Abdominal Surgery under Spinal Anaesthesia
Authors/Creators
- 1. Postgraduate, Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Sri Siddhartha Medical College and Research Institute, Tumkur, Karnataka, India
- 2. Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Sri Siddhartha Medical College and Research Institute, Tumkur, Karnataka, India
- 3. Professor and Head, Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Sri Siddhartha Medical College and Research Institute, Tumkur, Karnataka, India
Description
Background: Ropivacaine is a novel long-acting amide local anaesthetic that is comparable to bupivacaine in terms of its structure and pharmacodynamics. ln comparison to bupivacaine, ropivacaine has a reduced propensity to affect the central nervous system and a lower cardio-toxicity. Aims and Objectives: The aim of our study was to compare and assess the effectiveness and compare the block characteristics of hyperbaric ropivacaine 0.5% (18mg) versus hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% (18mg) for elective lower abdominal surgeries under spinal Anaesthesia. Materials & Methods: After approval of Institutional Ethical Committee, this prospective comparative study was conducted on 60 patients aged 18-60 years posted for elective lower abdominal surgeries under spinal anaesthesia after taking informed consent. Patients were randomly divided into two groups; Group B: received 18 mg (3.6 ml) of 0.5% Hyperbaric Bupivacaine intrathecally, while Group R received 18 mg (3.6 ml) of 0.5% Hyperbaric Ropivacaine, prepared aseptically by adding 1.2 ml (300 mg) of autoclaved 25% dextrose from a 10 ml ampoule to 2.4 ml of commercially available sterile preservative-free isobaric 0.75% Ropivacaine solution immediately prior to injection. The onset time for sensory, motor blockade, duration of anaesthesia and duration of analgesia, VAS score were observed in both the groups. The haemodynamic variables and any untoward side effects were noted in both groups. Result: The onset of sensory and motor blockade was similar in both groups. Hemodynamic variables were found to be more stable in the Ropivacaine group. Conclusion: Hyperbaric Ropivacaine demonstrated comparable block quality to commonly used hyperbaric 0.5% bupivacaine when administered intrathecally for elective lower abdominal surgeries under spinal anesthesia.
Abstract (English)
Background: Ropivacaine is a novel long-acting amide local anaesthetic that is comparable to bupivacaine in terms of its structure and pharmacodynamics. ln comparison to bupivacaine, ropivacaine has a reduced propensity to affect the central nervous system and a lower cardio-toxicity. Aims and Objectives: The aim of our study was to compare and assess the effectiveness and compare the block characteristics of hyperbaric ropivacaine 0.5% (18mg) versus hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% (18mg) for elective lower abdominal surgeries under spinal Anaesthesia. Materials & Methods: After approval of Institutional Ethical Committee, this prospective comparative study was conducted on 60 patients aged 18-60 years posted for elective lower abdominal surgeries under spinal anaesthesia after taking informed consent. Patients were randomly divided into two groups; Group B: received 18 mg (3.6 ml) of 0.5% Hyperbaric Bupivacaine intrathecally, while Group R received 18 mg (3.6 ml) of 0.5% Hyperbaric Ropivacaine, prepared aseptically by adding 1.2 ml (300 mg) of autoclaved 25% dextrose from a 10 ml ampoule to 2.4 ml of commercially available sterile preservative-free isobaric 0.75% Ropivacaine solution immediately prior to injection. The onset time for sensory, motor blockade, duration of anaesthesia and duration of analgesia, VAS score were observed in both the groups. The haemodynamic variables and any untoward side effects were noted in both groups. Result: The onset of sensory and motor blockade was similar in both groups. Hemodynamic variables were found to be more stable in the Ropivacaine group. Conclusion: Hyperbaric Ropivacaine demonstrated comparable block quality to commonly used hyperbaric 0.5% bupivacaine when administered intrathecally for elective lower abdominal surgeries under spinal anesthesia.
Files
IJPCR,Vol16,Issue8,Article18.pdf
Files
(373.5 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:4b42980881f4363f6cf579b1edf2931e
|
373.5 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2024-07-26
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/16/IJPCR,Vol16,Issue8,Article18.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Kulkarni KR, Deshpande S, Namazi I, Singh SK, Kondilya K. A comparative evaluation of hyperbaric ropivacaine versus hyperbaric bupivacaine for elective surgery under spinal anesthesia. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2014; 30(2):238-242. 2. Chung, Chanjong & Choi, So-Ron & Yeo, Kwang-Hwan & Park, Han-Suk & Lee, Soo-Il & Chin, Young-Jhoon. (2001). Hyperbaric Spinal Ropivacaine for Cesarean Delivery: A Comparison to Hyperbaric Bupivacaine. Anesthesia and analgesia. 93. 157-61. 3. Whiteside JB, Burke D, Wildsmith JAW. Comparison of Ropivacaine 0.5% (in glucose 5%) with Bupivacaine 0.5% (in glucose 8%) for spinal anaesthesia for elective surgery. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2003; 90(3):304-308. 4. Hartmann B, Junger A, Klasen J, Benson M, Jost A, Banzhaf A, Hempelmann G. The incidence and risk factors for hypotension after spinal anesthesia induction: an analysis with automated data collection. Anesth Analg. 2002 Jun; 94(6):1521-9, table of contents. 5. Carpenter RL, Caplan RA, Brown DL, Stephenson C, Wu R. Incidence and risk factors for side effects of spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1992 Jun; 76(6):906-16. 6. Hampl KF, Schneider MC, ummenhofer W, Drewe J. Transient Neurologic Symptoms After Spinal Anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 1995; 81:1148-53. 7. Schneider M, Ettlin T, Kaufman M.. Tranient Neurological Toxicity after Hyperbaric Subarachnoid Anesthesia with 5% Lidocaine. Anesth Analg. 1993; 76:1154-7. 8. Pollock JE, Neal JM, Stephenson RN, Wiley CE. Prospective Study of the Incidence of Transient Radicular Iirritation in Patients Undergoing Spinal Anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1991; 84:1361-7. 9. Freedman JM, Li KD, Drasner K. Transient Neurologic Symptoms after Spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1998; 89:633-41.10. Hodgson PS, Neal JM, Pollock JE and Liu SS. The Neurotoxicity of Drugs given Intrathecally (Spinal). Anesth Analg. 1999; 88:797-809. 11. Whiteside JB, Burke D and Wildsmith JAW. Spinal anesthesia with ropivacaine 5 mg ml-1 in glucose 10mg ml-1 0r 50 mg ml-1. Br J Anaesth. 2001; 86:241-4. 12. McDonald SB, Liu SS, Kopacz DJ, Stephenson CA. Hyperbaric spinal Ropivacaine. A comparison to Bupivacaine in volunteers. Anesthesiology. 1999; 90:971-7. 13. McDonald SB, Liu SS, Kopacz DJ, Stephenson CA. Hyperbaric spinal Ropivacaine. A comparison to Bupivacaine in volunteers. Anesthesiology. 1999; 90:971-7. 14. Chung CJ, Yun SH, Hwang GB, Park JS, Chin YJ. Intrathecal fentanyl added to hyperbaric ropivacaine for cesarean delivery. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2002 Nov-Dec; 27(6):600-3. 15. Gupta, et al.: Clinical efficacy of hyperbaric ropivacaine with hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia for TURP. 16. Gautier P, Kock MD, Huberty L, Demir T, Izydorczic M, Vanderick B. Comparison of the effects of intrathecal ropivacaine, levobupivacaine, and bupivacaine for Caesarean section. Br J Anaesth. 2003; 91(5):684–9. 17. Whiteside JB, Burke D and Wildsmith JAW. Spinal anesthesia with ropivacaine 5 mg ml-1 in glucose 10mg ml-1 0r 50 mg ml-1. Br J Anaesth. 2001; 86:241-4. 18. Casati A, Vinciguerra F. Intrathecal anesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2002 Oct; 15(5):543- 51.