Literature DB >> 14693590

Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: a comparison with lidocaine in volunteers.

Mary E Kouri1, Dan J Kopacz.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Subarachnoid lidocaine has been the anesthetic of choice for outpatient spinal anesthesia. However, its use is associated with transient neurologic symptoms (TNS). Preservative-free formulations of 2-chloroprocaine are now available and may compare favorably with lidocaine for spinal anesthesia. In this double-blinded, randomized, crossover study, we compared spinal chloroprocaine and lidocaine in 8 volunteers, each receiving 2 spinal anesthetics: 1 with 40 mg 2% lidocaine and the other with 40 mg 2% preservative-free 2-chloroprocaine. Pinprick anesthesia, tolerance to transcutaneous electrical stimulation and thigh tourniquet, motor strength, and a simulated discharge pathway were assessed. Chloroprocaine produced anesthetic efficacy similar to lidocaine, including peak block height (T8 [T5-11] versus T8 [T6-12], P = 0.8183) and tourniquet tolerance (46 +/- 6 min versus 38 +/- 24 min, P = 0.4897). Chloroprocaine anesthesia resulted in faster resolution of sensory (103 +/- 13 min versus 126 +/- 16 min, P = 0.0045) and more rapid attainment of simulated discharge criteria (104 +/- 12 min versus 134 +/- 14 min, P = 0.0007). Lidocaine was associated with mild to moderate TNS in 7 of 8 subjects; no subject complained of TNS with chloroprocaine (P = 0.0004). We conclude that the anesthetic profile of chloroprocaine compares favorably with lidocaine. Reliable sensory and motor blockade with predictable duration and minimal side effects make chloroprocaine an attractive choice for outpatient spinal anesthesia. IMPLICATIONS: The spinal anesthetic profile of chloroprocaine (40 mg) compares favorably with the same dose of spinal lidocaine. Reliable sensory and motor blockade with predictable duration and minimal side effects and without signs of transient neurological symptoms make chloroprocaine an attractive choice for outpatient spinal anesthesia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14693590     DOI: 10.1213/01.ane.0000093228.61443.ee

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  7 in total

Review 1.  Anaesthetic agents for advanced regional anaesthesia: a North American perspective.

Authors:  Chester C Buckenmaier; Lisa L Bleckner
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 9.546

2.  A Comparative Study of Isobaric 1% Chloroprocaine With 0.5% Isobaric Bupivacaine for Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy Under Spinal Anaesthesia: A Prospective Randomised Study.

Authors:  Sugumar M; Atul K Singh; Amrita Rath; Abhinay Jayanthi
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-04-30

3.  Chloroprocaine Provides Safe, Effective, Short-Acting Spinal Anesthesia Ideal for Ambulatory Surgeries: A Retrospective Review.

Authors:  David H Kim; Richard Kahn; Andrew Lee; Phuong Dinh Mac; Yu-Fen Chiu; Jacques Yadeau; Jiabin Liu
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2019-08-26

4.  Spinal Anesthesia Using Chloroprocaine is Safe, Effective, and Facilitates Earlier Discharge in Selected Fast-track Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Carl L Herndon; Roxana Martinez; Nana O Sarpong; Jeffrey A Geller; Roshan P Shah; H John Cooper
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2020-06-01

5.  A comparative study on the effect of addition of intrathecal buprenorphine to 2-chloroprocaine spinal anesthesia in short duration surgeries.

Authors:  Jayaprakash Siddaiah; Vinayak S Pujari; Ashok S Madalu; Yatish Bevinaguddaiah; Leena H Parate
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2019 Oct-Dec

6.  A Prospective Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare Intrathecal 1% 2-Chloroprocaine Versus 0.5% Bupivacaine in Ambulatory Elective Surgeries.

Authors:  Balwinderjit Singh; Asha Anand; Joginder Pal Attri
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2020-10-12

7.  Spinal anaesthesia with Chloroprocaine HCl 1% for elective lower limb procedures of short duration: a prospective, randomised, observer-blind study in adult patients.

Authors:  Daniela Ghisi; Giorgia Boschetto; Alessandra Maria Spinelli; Sandra Giannone; Jacopo Frugiuele; Marcello Ciccarello; Stefano Bonarelli
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2021-02-20       Impact factor: 2.217

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.