高压布比卡因与高压罗哌卡因在下段剖宫产术中的阻滞特征:一项随机实验研究

P. Shah, R. Bhuaarya, Mohammed F. Sheikh
{"title":"高压布比卡因与高压罗哌卡因在下段剖宫产术中的阻滞特征:一项随机实验研究","authors":"P. Shah, R. Bhuaarya, Mohammed F. Sheikh","doi":"10.33545/26643766.2023.v6.i2b.401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Bupivacaine is used most commonly for spinal anesthesia, however the major concern is longer duration and cardiotoxicity, that led us to find safe alternative with shorter duration. Hence, we compared routinely used hyperbaric bupivacaine with recently available hyperbaric ropivacaine in terms of block characteristics in caesarean section (CS). Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of hyperbaric ropivacaine and bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia for elective CS with primary outcome as onset of sensory block at T 10 level & secondary outcomes as onset of motor block, grading & duration of sensory and motor block, duration of analgesia, hemodynamic changes & side effects. Methodology: Eighty parturients with ASA grade ІІ undergoing elective CS were allocated into two groups (n=40): group R (2 ml hyperbaric ropivacaine 0.75%) and group B (2 ml hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5%). Result: Though onset of sensory block (group B 3.40±0.63 min & in group R 4.13±0.79min) & motor block (group B 5.28±0.82 min & group R 7.10±0.84min) (p<0.001) were significantly shorter in group B, but duration of sensory & motor block and duration of analgesia was significantly shorter in group R (p<0.001). Incidence of side effects (i.e. hypotension, nausea & vomiting, shivering) was comparable in both the groups. Conclusion: Ropivacaine can be preferred as an alternative to bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia in cesarean section because of early recovery & lesser side effects.","PeriodicalId":14146,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Block characteristics of hyperbaric bupivacaine versus hyperbaric ropivacaine in lower segment cesarean section: A randomized experimental study\",\"authors\":\"P. Shah, R. Bhuaarya, Mohammed F. Sheikh\",\"doi\":\"10.33545/26643766.2023.v6.i2b.401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Bupivacaine is used most commonly for spinal anesthesia, however the major concern is longer duration and cardiotoxicity, that led us to find safe alternative with shorter duration. Hence, we compared routinely used hyperbaric bupivacaine with recently available hyperbaric ropivacaine in terms of block characteristics in caesarean section (CS). Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of hyperbaric ropivacaine and bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia for elective CS with primary outcome as onset of sensory block at T 10 level & secondary outcomes as onset of motor block, grading & duration of sensory and motor block, duration of analgesia, hemodynamic changes & side effects. Methodology: Eighty parturients with ASA grade ІІ undergoing elective CS were allocated into two groups (n=40): group R (2 ml hyperbaric ropivacaine 0.75%) and group B (2 ml hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5%). Result: Though onset of sensory block (group B 3.40±0.63 min & in group R 4.13±0.79min) & motor block (group B 5.28±0.82 min & group R 7.10±0.84min) (p<0.001) were significantly shorter in group B, but duration of sensory & motor block and duration of analgesia was significantly shorter in group R (p<0.001). Incidence of side effects (i.e. hypotension, nausea & vomiting, shivering) was comparable in both the groups. Conclusion: Ropivacaine can be preferred as an alternative to bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia in cesarean section because of early recovery & lesser side effects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33545/26643766.2023.v6.i2b.401\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33545/26643766.2023.v6.i2b.401","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:布比卡因是脊髓麻醉中最常用的药物,但主要的问题是持续时间长和心脏毒性,这促使我们寻找安全、持续时间短的替代药物。因此,我们比较了常规使用的高压布比卡因和最近可用的高压罗哌卡因在剖宫产(CS)中的阻滞特征。目的:比较高压氧罗哌卡因和布比卡因用于选择性脊髓麻醉的疗效和安全性,主要指标为t10级感觉阻滞的发生,次要指标为运动阻滞的发生、感觉和运动阻滞的分级和持续时间、镇痛持续时间、血流动力学变化和副作用。方法:80例ASA级ІІ行选择性CS的产妇分为两组(n=40): R组(2 ml高压罗哌卡因0.75%)和B组(2 ml高压布比卡因0.5%)。结果:B组感觉阻滞(B组3.40±0.63 min, R组4.13±0.79min)和运动阻滞(B组5.28±0.82 min, R组7.10±0.84min)的发作时间(p<0.001)明显短于B组,但R组感觉、运动阻滞持续时间和镇痛持续时间明显短于R组(p<0.001)。两组的副作用发生率(如低血压、恶心呕吐、寒战)相当。结论:罗哌卡因恢复早、副作用小,可替代布比卡因用于剖宫产术中脊髓麻醉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Block characteristics of hyperbaric bupivacaine versus hyperbaric ropivacaine in lower segment cesarean section: A randomized experimental study
Introduction: Bupivacaine is used most commonly for spinal anesthesia, however the major concern is longer duration and cardiotoxicity, that led us to find safe alternative with shorter duration. Hence, we compared routinely used hyperbaric bupivacaine with recently available hyperbaric ropivacaine in terms of block characteristics in caesarean section (CS). Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of hyperbaric ropivacaine and bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia for elective CS with primary outcome as onset of sensory block at T 10 level & secondary outcomes as onset of motor block, grading & duration of sensory and motor block, duration of analgesia, hemodynamic changes & side effects. Methodology: Eighty parturients with ASA grade ІІ undergoing elective CS were allocated into two groups (n=40): group R (2 ml hyperbaric ropivacaine 0.75%) and group B (2 ml hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5%). Result: Though onset of sensory block (group B 3.40±0.63 min & in group R 4.13±0.79min) & motor block (group B 5.28±0.82 min & group R 7.10±0.84min) (p<0.001) were significantly shorter in group B, but duration of sensory & motor block and duration of analgesia was significantly shorter in group R (p<0.001). Incidence of side effects (i.e. hypotension, nausea & vomiting, shivering) was comparable in both the groups. Conclusion: Ropivacaine can be preferred as an alternative to bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia in cesarean section because of early recovery & lesser side effects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Retrospective study: The impact of BUHE positioning and video laryngoscopy on intubation success rates in the emergency department Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio versus lactate-albumin ratio as a predictor of morbidity and mortality in patients with sepsis and septic shock Prediction of spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension in cesarian section with focus on carotid doppler ultrasound and cardiometry to study the effectiveness of dexamethasone as an adjuvant with levobupivacaine 0.5% in USG guided interscalene brachial plexus block for shoulder surgeries The effect of ultrasound-guided bilateral single shot pecto-intercostal plane block on recovery after on-pump coronary bypass graft surgery, randomized controlled trial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1