BACKGROUND:Postoperative pain is less intense after laparoscopic surgery than after open surgery. However, patients may gain additional benefit from a preincisional local infiltration of anesthetic. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of two local anesthetics, ropivacaine and levobupivacaine, for tissue infiltration as a means of improving postoperative pain control after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Using a randomized, double-blind study design, 57 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I and II patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly assigned to receive local infiltration with 0.9% saline solution (Placebo group, n = 18), ropivacaine 1% (Rop group, n = 20), or levobupivacaine 0.5% (Lev group, n = 19). The local anesthetic was administered, prior to trocar placement, using the same technique and delivering the same volume (20 ml) for all three groups. The anesthetic technique was standardized for all groups. Postoperative pain was rated at 2 h, 4 h, and 24 h postoperatively by visual analogue scale (VAS) score. Cumulative analgesic consumption and adverse effects were also recorded. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by a post hoc test. RESULTS: The Lev and Rop groups did not differ significantly in their VAS scores at 2 h postoperatively, but the Lev group experienced significantly ( p < 0.001) less pain than the Placebo and Rop groups at 4 h and 24 h postoperatively. The Rop group registered significantly lower VAS scores ( p < 0.001) than the Placebo group at 4 h postoperatively. Additionally, the consumption of analgesics was significantly lower in the Lev group than in the Rop ( p < 0.01) and Placebo ( p < 0.001) groups, and patients in the Rop group consumed significantly less analgesics ( p < 0.001) than the to patients in the Placebo group. CONCLUSION: Local tissue infiltration with levobupivacaine is more effective than ropivacaine in reducing the postoperative pain associated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Postoperative pain is less intense after laparoscopic surgery than after open surgery. However, patients may gain additional benefit from a preincisional local infiltration of anesthetic. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of two local anesthetics, ropivacaine and levobupivacaine, for tissue infiltration as a means of improving postoperative pain control after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Using a randomized, double-blind study design, 57 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I and II patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly assigned to receive local infiltration with 0.9% saline solution (Placebo group, n = 18), ropivacaine 1% (Rop group, n = 20), or levobupivacaine 0.5% (Lev group, n = 19). The local anesthetic was administered, prior to trocar placement, using the same technique and delivering the same volume (20 ml) for all three groups. The anesthetic technique was standardized for all groups. Postoperative pain was rated at 2 h, 4 h, and 24 h postoperatively by visual analogue scale (VAS) score. Cumulative analgesic consumption and adverse effects were also recorded. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by a post hoc test. RESULTS: The Lev and Rop groups did not differ significantly in their VAS scores at 2 h postoperatively, but the Lev group experienced significantly ( p < 0.001) less pain than the Placebo and Rop groups at 4 h and 24 h postoperatively. The Rop group registered significantly lower VAS scores ( p < 0.001) than the Placebo group at 4 h postoperatively. Additionally, the consumption of analgesics was significantly lower in the Lev group than in the Rop ( p < 0.01) and Placebo ( p < 0.001) groups, and patients in the Rop group consumed significantly less analgesics ( p < 0.001) than the to patients in the Placebo group. CONCLUSION: Local tissue infiltration with levobupivacaine is more effective than ropivacaine in reducing the postoperative pain associated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Authors: U Maestroni; D Sortini; C Devito; F Pour Morad Kohan Brunaldi; G Anania; L Pavanelli; A Pasqualucci; A Donini Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2002-05-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Shaun M Coughlin; Paul J Karanicolas; Heather M A Emmerton-Coughlin; Bilge Kanbur; Savas Kanbur; Patrick H D Colquhoun Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-05-20 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Rohan C Siriwardana; Sumudu K Kumarage; Bhagya M Gunathilake; Suchintha B Thilakarathne; Jeevani S Wijesinghe Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-06-25 Impact factor: 4.584