A COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN 0.5% LEVOBUPIVACAINE AND 0.75% ROPIVACAINE IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING ELECTIVE LOWER LIMB SURGERIES UNDER SUBARACHNOID BLOCK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2023.v16i5.49681Keywords:
Levobupivacaine, Ropivacaine, Subarchnoid block, SurgeryAbstract
Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of 0.5% levobupivacaine and 0.75% ropivacaine after intrathecal administration in elective lower limb surgeries.
Methods: A prospective, randomized, controlled, and double-blind study was conducted on 100 patients undergoing elective lower limb surgeries under subarachnoid block using 0.5% levobupivacaine and 0.75% ropivacaine.
Results: Demographic characteristics of both groups are comparable. It is observed the onset of sensory blockade is earlier in ropivacaine group, Grade 4 bromage scale motor blockade onset is shorter in levobupivacaine and most of the parameters are comparable between two groups. Duration of sensory blockade is more in ropivacaine when compared to levobupivacaine. Levobupivacaine is more cardiostable with stable hemodynamic profile compared to ropivacaine.
Conclusion: Levobupivacaine is more cardiostable with stable hemodynamic profile compared to ropivacaine.
Downloads
References
McClure JH. Ropivacaine. Br J Anaesth 1996;76:300-7. doi: 10.1093/ bja/76.2.300, PMID: 8777115
Bajwa SJ, Kaur J. Clinical profile of levobupivacaine in regional anesthesia: A systematic review. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2013;29:530-9. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.119172, PMID: 24249993; PMCID: PMC3819850
Luck JF, Fettes PD, Wildsmith JA. Spinal anaesthesia for elective surgery: A comparison of hyperbaric solutions of racemic bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, and ropivacaine. Br J Anaesth 2008;101:705-10. doi: 10.1093/bja/aen250, PMID: 18765643
Bhat SN, Himaldev, Upadya M. Comparison of efficacy and safety of ropivacaine with bupivacaine for intrathecal anesthesia for lower abdominal and lower limb surgeries. Anesth Essays Res 2013;7:381-5. doi: 10.4103/0259-1162.123252. PMID: 25885988; PMCID: PMC4173549
Gautier P, De Kock M, Huberty L, Demir T, Izydorczic M, Vanderick B. Comparison of the effects of intrathecal ropivacaine, levobupivacaine, and bupivacaine for caesarean section. Br J Anaesth 2003;91:684-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeg251, PMID: 14570791
Gozaydin O, Gulen G, Atalan G, Kaydul M. Comparison of hyperbaric levobupivacaine with hyperbaric bupivacaine in unilateral inguinal hernia operations performed under spinal anesthesia. Arch Clin Exp Surg 2014;3:1-9. doi:10.5455/aces.20130724023552
Fettes PD, Hocking G, Peterson MK, Luck JF, Wildsmith JA. Comparison of plain and hyperbaric solutions of ropivacaine for spinal anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2005;94:107-11. doi: 10.1093/bja/aei008, PMID: 15516352
Dizman S, Turker G, Gurbet A, Mogol EB, Turkcan S, Karakuzu Z. Comparison of two different doses of intrathecal levobupivacaine for transurethral endoscopic surgery. Eurasian J Med 2011;43:103-8. doi: 10.5152/eajm.2011.23, PMID: 25610173; PMCID: PMC4261346
Chari VR, Sahu P, Wani N. Comparision between intrathecal isobaric ropivacaine 0.75% with hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5%: A double blind randomized control study. Anaesth Pain Intensive Care 2013;17: 261-6.
Baydilek Y, Yurtlu BS, Hanci V, Ayoğlu H, Okyay RD, Kayhan GE, et al. The comparison of levobupivacaine in continuous or single dose spinal anesthesia for transurethral resection of prostate surgery. Braz J Anesthesiol 2014;64:89-97. doi: 10.1016/j.bjane.2013.03.007, PMID: 24794450
Vanna O, Chumsang L, Thongmee S. Levobupivacaine and bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia for transurethral endoscopic surgery. J Med Assoc Thai 2006;89:1133-9. PMID: 17048421
Fattorini F, Ricci Z, Rocco A, Romano R, Pascarella MA, Pinto G. Levobupivacaine versus racemic bupivacaine for spinal anaesthesia in orthopaedic major surgery. Minerva Anestesiol 2006;72:637-44. (English, Italian). PMID: 16865082
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2023 AMAN SAI GUNTREDDY, DURGASHEKAR BABU DIKKALA
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The publication is licensed under CC By and is open access. Copyright is with author and allowed to retain publishing rights without restrictions.