Hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine: a comparison to bupivacaine in volunteers

McDonald, Susan B.; Liu, Spencer S.; Kopacz, Dan J.; Stephenson, Carol

doi:10.1016/s1098-7339(99)90185-2

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We found highly significant difference in two groups as regards to the duration of motor block, group R (96.7± 41.31 min) show shorter duration than group B (160 ± 31.99 min). Our results regarding the motor blockade were agreement with various studies [10,[13][14][15][16][17][18][19][21][22][23][24][25][26]. Present study shown that, in spite of slight hypotension in both group but there was no significant difference between both groups as regards hemodynamic stability.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…After spinal anaesthesia mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure was decreased from 5 minutes onwards in both groups intraoperatively and postoperatively, but difference between two groups was statistically significant. This result correlates with different studies [15,17,[19][20][21][22]25,[27][28][29]. The statistical analysis of arterial oxygen saturation values for two groups at early and late intraoperative and postoperative period respectively (reading of later four periods taken as mean readings) shows that there was no statistically significant difference in two groups at these five periods.(P>0.05).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A comparative study of 0.5% hyperbaric Ropivacaine versus 0.5% hyperbaric Bupivacaine for spinal anaesthesia

Ingale¹,

Dalal²,

Ingale³

et al. 2016

Int J of Biomed & Adv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims and Objective: Aim of the present study was to compare the clinical efficacy of 0.5% hyperbaric solutions of ropivacaine versus bupivacaine in terms of characteristics of spinal blockade, haemodynamic stability, recovery profile and side effects. Material and Method:The study enrolling 100 patients (age 20-60 years) of either sex, ASA grade I & II were randomly allocated in two groups. Group R received 3 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric ropivacaine with glucose 8.33% and Group B received 3 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with glucose 8%. After induction, we studied the various parameters of subarachnoid block, hemodynamic variables, recovery and side effects. Result: Hyperbaric ropivacaine had late onset of sensory blockade, equal time to reach maximum dermatome level, early regression and shorter total duration of sensory blockade as compared to bupivacaine. Ropivacaine shows late onset of motor blockade, less degree and total duration of motor blockade as compared to bupivacaine. Ropivacaine was more hemodynamically stable as compared to bupivacaine. Both the sensory and motor blocks were subject to a more rapid recovery with ropivacaine compared with bupivacaine. Hyperbaric ropivacaine was not associated with any side effects intra and postoperatively. Conclusion: 3 ml of hyperbaric solution of ropivacaine 0.5% with glucose 8.33% can produce predictable and reliable spinal anaesthesia for a wide range of surgical procedure.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

A comparative study of 0.5% hyperbaric Ropivacaine versus 0.5% hyperbaric Bupivacaine for spinal anaesthesia

Ingale¹,

Dalal²,

Ingale³

et al. 2016

Int J of Biomed & Adv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results are in agreement with a study that compared the intrathecal administration of the two local anaesthetics [10]. Clearly, the analgesic effects as well as the effects on motor block of both bupivacaine and ropivacaine can only be properly evaluated when comparing equipotent doses.…”

supporting

confidence: 89%

Ropivacaine and bupivacaine in obstetric analgesia

Capogna¹

2002

EJA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This was a concern for intrathecal ropivacaine, since early reports showed a 28% incidence of back pain. 45 Nevertheless, these findings were not confirmed by other studies. 44 No transient neurological symptoms occurred in either group, which is in accordance with current literature, 27,33,39,46 suggesting that both local anesthetics are safe for same-day spinal anesthesia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Intrathecal hyperbaric 2% prilocaine versus 0.4% plain ropivacaine for same-day arthroscopic knee surgery: a prospective randomized double-blind controlled study

Aguirre

Borgeat

Bühler

et al. 2015

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intrathecal hyperbaric 2% prilocaine versus 0.4% plain ropivacaine for same-day arthroscopic knee surgery: a prospective randomized double-blind controlled study Prilocaïne 2 % hyperbare versus ropivacaïne 0,4 % en injection intrathécale pour une arthroscopie du genou en chirurgie ambulatoire: une étude randomisée contrôlée prospective à double insu AbstractBackground Short-duration spinal anesthesia is a good option for ambulatory knee surgery. Hyperbaric 2% prilocaine has short onset and rapid recovery times and, therefore, may be well suited in this setting. The aim of this study was to compare the times to reach motor block, motor block resolution, and discharge from the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) between hyperbaric 2% prilocaine and 0.4% plain ropivacaine.Methods In this prospective randomized double-blind study, 140 patients (ages 18-80 yr and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II) scheduled for elective unilateral arthroscopic knee surgery lasting \ 45 min were allocated to either 3 mL of 2% prilocaine (60 mg) or 3 mL of 0.4% plain ropivacaine (12 mg). Time to reach complete recovery of motor block, time to reach criteria for discharge, as well as side effects up to 48 hr after discharge were recorded. Results The median (interquartile range [IQR]) time to recovery from the motor block was faster in the 2% prilocaine group compared with the 0.4% ropivacaine group (180 [169-240] min vs 240 [180-300] min, respectively; median difference, 60 min, 95% confidence interval (CI), 23 to 97 min; P = 0.036). The median [IQR] time to reach discharge criteria was similar between the two groups (330 min vs, 335 [290-395] min; median difference 5 min, 95% CI, -25 to 35 min; P = 0.330). The incidence of side effects was low and similar in both groups. No case of transient neurologic symptoms occurred in either group. Conclusion The recovery of motor block was faster after intrathecal administration of hyperbaric 2% prilocaine compared with 0.4% plain ropivacaine; however, discharge time was similar between the two groups. Both drugs showed a similar risk profile. RésuméContexte La rachianesthésie de courte durée est une bonne option lorsqu'on pratique une chirurgie ambulatoire du genou. Le délai d'action de la prilocaïne 2 % hyperbare est court et son temps de récupération rapide; cet agent

show abstract

Hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine: a comparison to bupivacaine in volunteers

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

A comparative study of 0.5% hyperbaric Ropivacaine versus 0.5% hyperbaric Bupivacaine for spinal anaesthesia

A comparative study of 0.5% hyperbaric Ropivacaine versus 0.5% hyperbaric Bupivacaine for spinal anaesthesia

Ropivacaine and bupivacaine in obstetric analgesia

Intrathecal hyperbaric 2% prilocaine versus 0.4% plain ropivacaine for same-day arthroscopic knee surgery: a prospective randomized double-blind controlled study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About