Literature DB >> 15506554

Comparison of the effect of two different doses of 0.75% glucose-free ropivacaine for spinal anesthesia for lower limb and lower abdominal surgery.

John On-Nin Wong1, Thomas Dou-Moo Tan, Pak-On Leung, Kin-Fui Tseng, Ning-Wei Cheu, Chao-Shun Tang.   

Abstract

We compared the clinical efficacy and safety of two doses of ropivacaine for spinal anesthesia in Chinese patients undergoing lower limb and lower abdominal surgery. In this randomized, open-label study, 40 patients were divided into two groups: group A received 3.5 mL (26.25 mg) of 0.75% glucose-free ropivacaine, and group B received 4.5 mL (33.75 mg). Sensory and motor blocks were assessed during and after surgery through to complete recovery. Seven standard measurements were taken: time to onset of sensory blocks; maximum sensory cephalad spread; time to maximum sensory block; maximum number of blocked segments; duration of sensory block at L3; time to onset of complete motor block; and duration until complete motor block recovery. Vital signs and any adverse effects related to spinal anesthesia were also recorded. No significant differences were found between the two groups: time to onset of sensory block at L3 in group A vs B (2.1 +/- 9.6 vs 1.7 +/- 7.3 minutes), maximum cephalad spread [T4-5 (C3-T11) vs T4 (C3-T8)], maximum number of blocked segments (18.0 +/- 3.4 vs 19.8 +/- 3.7), time to maximum sensory block (34.0 +/- 22.9 vs 26.8 +/- 17.9 minutes), duration of sensory block at L3 (251.2 +/- 34.7 vs 277.3 +/- 51.1 minutes), time to onset of complete motor block (13.4 +/- 6.4 vs 10.3 +/- 3.4 minutes), and time for complete recovery from motor block (264 +/- 52.1 vs 292.5 +/- 64.5 minutes). No significant differences in global hemodynamic changes were found during and after the operation. While shivering was more frequent in group B during the operation, the difference was not significant. Otherwise, there were no differences in adverse effects during and after surgery. We conclude that both doses of 0.75% glucose-free ropivacaine, 26.25 mg (3.5 mL) and 33.75 mg (4.5 mL), have the same efficacy and safety in Chinese patients undergoing spinal anesthesia for lower limb and lower abdominal surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15506554     DOI: 10.1016/S1607-551X(09)70180-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Kaohsiung J Med Sci        ISSN: 1607-551X            Impact factor:   2.744


  5 in total

1.  Use of Ropivacaine intrathecally.

Authors:  S Kurdi Madhuri; Kumari B Anjali
Journal:  J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2010-10

2.  Intrathecal fentanyl as an adjuvant to 0.75% isobaric ropivacaine for infraumbilical surgery under subarachnoid block: A prospective study.

Authors:  Kumkum Gupta; Surjeet Singh; Deepak Sharma; Prashant K Gupta; Atul Krishan; M N Pandey
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2014-01

3.  Efficacy of spinal ropivacaine versus ropivacaine with fentanyl in transurethral resection operations.

Authors:  A Chaudhary; J Bogra; P K Singh; S Saxena; G Chandra; R Verma
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2014-01

Review 4.  Update on the clinical utility and practical use of ropivacaine in Chinese patients.

Authors:  Man Li; Li Wan; Wei Mei; Yuke Tian
Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther       Date:  2014-09-09       Impact factor: 4.162

5.  The effects of isobaric and hyperbaric bupivacaine on maternal hemodynamic changes post spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery: A prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Shamill Eanga Helill; Wossenyeleh Admasu Sahile; Ritbano Ahmed Abdo; Getahun Dendir Wolde; Hassen Mosa Halil
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.