2016
DOI: 10.5935/1806-0013.20160027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of postoperative analgesia with intraperitoneal ropivacaine instillation in videolaparoscopic cholecystectomy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…With respect to the second dose of rescue analgesic required, we observed that in group R only 5 (16.6%) patients required second dose of rescue analgesic as compared to 13 (43.3%) in group B. Similar results were obtained in studies conducted by Albuquerque et al, 23 Porika et al 14 The findings of our study were also supported by a study conducted by Sharan et al 22 in which similar results were obtained with lesser number of patients requiring rescue analgesic with ropivacaine as compared to bupivacaine. VAS score was used to assess the quality of analgesia.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…With respect to the second dose of rescue analgesic required, we observed that in group R only 5 (16.6%) patients required second dose of rescue analgesic as compared to 13 (43.3%) in group B. Similar results were obtained in studies conducted by Albuquerque et al, 23 Porika et al 14 The findings of our study were also supported by a study conducted by Sharan et al 22 in which similar results were obtained with lesser number of patients requiring rescue analgesic with ropivacaine as compared to bupivacaine. VAS score was used to assess the quality of analgesia.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The sample size was calculated based on the reduction of total dose of opioid consumption within the first postoperative 24 hours compared to baseline values by about 50% as in a previous similar study (11) (0.0301±0.04 versus 0.0639±0.04) mg kg -1 and the difference required a total sample size of 31 patients for each group to obtain 95 % power at a 5% significant level. The number of patients in each group was increased to 35 patients as drop out of 10% of patients was expected.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%