Nicoli F Bettin, Kaitlyn L Crawford, Jessica J Peterson
{"title":"2%甲哌卡因与0.5%等比重布比卡因腰麻在全膝关节置换术中的比较。","authors":"Nicoli F Bettin, Kaitlyn L Crawford, Jessica J Peterson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Spinal anesthesia is an option for patients during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures. Spinal anesthesia can offer advantages and disadvantages to the patient's experience and outcomes. We conducted an evidence-based, quality improvement project comparing mepivacaine 2% and isobaric bupivacaine 0.5% and retrospectively assessed specific intraoperative and postoperative outcomes that were of interest to the staff at the hospital where the project was completed. Primary outcome measures of interest included intraoperative heart rate, blood pressure, vasopressor use, fluid resuscitation, postoperative pain scores, use of opioid analgesic medications, and time to ambulation after administration of the spinal anesthetic. Compared with patients receiving isobaric bupivacaine 0.5% (n = 30), patients receiving mepivacaine 2% (n = 30) had greater intraoperative hemodynamic stability (defined as heart rate and blood pressure maintained within 20% of baseline values) during the first 30 minutes after anesthetic administration (<i>P</i> < .05 for multiple time points). They also required less opioid medication for postoperative pain management (25 vs 50 mcg fentanyl) and were able to ambulate sooner after the procedure (mean [standard deviation], 452.2 [218.5] vs 681.0 [476.6] minutes; <i>P</i> = .006). In conclusion, mepivacaine 2% was the higher-performing local primary spinal anesthetic for patients undergoing TKA.</p>","PeriodicalId":7104,"journal":{"name":"AANA journal","volume":"91 4","pages":"267-272"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Mepivacaine 2% and Isobaric Bupivacaine 0.5% Spinal Anesthetics for Total Knee Arthroplasty.\",\"authors\":\"Nicoli F Bettin, Kaitlyn L Crawford, Jessica J Peterson\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Spinal anesthesia is an option for patients during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures. Spinal anesthesia can offer advantages and disadvantages to the patient's experience and outcomes. We conducted an evidence-based, quality improvement project comparing mepivacaine 2% and isobaric bupivacaine 0.5% and retrospectively assessed specific intraoperative and postoperative outcomes that were of interest to the staff at the hospital where the project was completed. Primary outcome measures of interest included intraoperative heart rate, blood pressure, vasopressor use, fluid resuscitation, postoperative pain scores, use of opioid analgesic medications, and time to ambulation after administration of the spinal anesthetic. Compared with patients receiving isobaric bupivacaine 0.5% (n = 30), patients receiving mepivacaine 2% (n = 30) had greater intraoperative hemodynamic stability (defined as heart rate and blood pressure maintained within 20% of baseline values) during the first 30 minutes after anesthetic administration (<i>P</i> < .05 for multiple time points). They also required less opioid medication for postoperative pain management (25 vs 50 mcg fentanyl) and were able to ambulate sooner after the procedure (mean [standard deviation], 452.2 [218.5] vs 681.0 [476.6] minutes; <i>P</i> = .006). In conclusion, mepivacaine 2% was the higher-performing local primary spinal anesthetic for patients undergoing TKA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7104,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AANA journal\",\"volume\":\"91 4\",\"pages\":\"267-272\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AANA journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AANA journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of Mepivacaine 2% and Isobaric Bupivacaine 0.5% Spinal Anesthetics for Total Knee Arthroplasty.
Spinal anesthesia is an option for patients during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures. Spinal anesthesia can offer advantages and disadvantages to the patient's experience and outcomes. We conducted an evidence-based, quality improvement project comparing mepivacaine 2% and isobaric bupivacaine 0.5% and retrospectively assessed specific intraoperative and postoperative outcomes that were of interest to the staff at the hospital where the project was completed. Primary outcome measures of interest included intraoperative heart rate, blood pressure, vasopressor use, fluid resuscitation, postoperative pain scores, use of opioid analgesic medications, and time to ambulation after administration of the spinal anesthetic. Compared with patients receiving isobaric bupivacaine 0.5% (n = 30), patients receiving mepivacaine 2% (n = 30) had greater intraoperative hemodynamic stability (defined as heart rate and blood pressure maintained within 20% of baseline values) during the first 30 minutes after anesthetic administration (P < .05 for multiple time points). They also required less opioid medication for postoperative pain management (25 vs 50 mcg fentanyl) and were able to ambulate sooner after the procedure (mean [standard deviation], 452.2 [218.5] vs 681.0 [476.6] minutes; P = .006). In conclusion, mepivacaine 2% was the higher-performing local primary spinal anesthetic for patients undergoing TKA.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1931 and located in Park Ridge, Ill., the AANA is the professional organization for more than 90 percent of the nation’s nurse anesthetists. As advanced practice nurses, CRNAs administer approximately 32 million anesthetics in the United States each year. CRNAs practice in every setting where anesthesia is available and are the sole anesthesia providers in more than two-thirds of all rural hospitals. They administer every type of anesthetic, and provide care for every type of surgery or procedure, from open heart to cataract to pain management.