What is it about?
Subarachnoid Hyperbaric Bupivacaine and Isobaric Levobupivacaine: A Prospective Randomized
Featured Image
Photo by Martin Adams on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Aim: The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy, block parameters and safety profile of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine and isobaric levobupivacaine for urological surgery. Methods: Urological patients who were scheduled for elective surgery under spinal anesthesia were enrolled in two groups. Group A received intrathecal 2.5 ml of (0.5%) hyperbaric bupivacaine, while Group B received intrathecal 2.5 ml of (0.5%) isobaric levobupivacaine. Sensory & motor block parameters, hemodynamic parameters and adverse effects in patients of both the groups were recorded. Results: The onset of sensory block, motor block and duration of motor block was comparable in both groups. Maximum height of sensory block was significantly higher in hyperbaric bupivacaine group and duration of sensory block was significantly higher in group B. Hemodynamic stability was better with levobupivacaine compared to hyperbaric bupivacaine. Hypotension and bradycardia were more common with hyperbaric bupivacaine group. In addition, nausea was noticed more frequently with hyperbaric bupivacaine. Other sideeffects such as headache, backache, itching, vomiting, and shivering were almost similar in both the groups. Conclusion: We conclude that isobaric levobupivacaine is superior to hyperbaric bupivacaine in terms of longer sensory blockade and shorter motor blockade and also that intrathecal use of isobaric levobupivacaine is hemodynamically more favorable than that of hyperbaric bupivacaine.
Perspectives
Aim: The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy, block parameters and safety profile of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine and isobaric levobupivacaine for urological surgery. Methods: Urological patients who were scheduled for elective surgery under spinal anesthesia were enrolled in two groups. Group A received intrathecal 2.5 ml of (0.5%) hyperbaric bupivacaine, while Group B received intrathecal 2.5 ml of (0.5%) isobaric levobupivacaine. Sensory & motor block parameters, hemodynamic parameters and adverse effects in patients of both the groups were recorded. Results: The onset of sensory block, motor block and duration of motor block was comparable in both groups. Maximum height of sensory block was significantly higher in hyperbaric bupivacaine group and duration of sensory block was significantly higher in group B. Hemodynamic stability was better with levobupivacaine compared to hyperbaric bupivacaine. Hypotension and bradycardia were more common with hyperbaric bupivacaine group. In addition, nausea was noticed more frequently with hyperbaric bupivacaine. Other sideeffects such as headache, backache, itching, vomiting, and shivering were almost similar in both the groups. Conclusion: We conclude that isobaric levobupivacaine is superior to hyperbaric bupivacaine in terms of longer sensory blockade and shorter motor blockade and also that intrathecal use of isobaric levobupivacaine is hemodynamically more favorable than that of hyperbaric bupivacaine.
Red Flower Publication Publications
Red Flower Publication Pvt Ltd
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Subarachnoid Hyperbaric Bupivacaine and Isobaric Levobupivacaine: A Prospective Randomized Double Blind Comparative Study, Indian Journal of Anaesthesia and Analgesia, January 2018, Red Flower Publication Private, Ltd.,
DOI: 10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.51018.23.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
