OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of long-acting local anesthetic (levobupivacaine) in addition to lidocaine for the management of femoral artery sheaths during and after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Femoral artery sheaths are commonly used during PCI. Sheath removal is often delayed after the procedure by which time short-acting local anesthetic agents may no longer be effective. METHODS:Sixty patients were randomized to either usual care or the administration of local levobupivacaine after PCI. Patients were asked to report their pain experienced on a visual analogue score. RESULTS:Thirty patients receivedadditional levobupivacaine (0.5%) and 30 received standard care. There were no procedural differences between the groups, except that more patients in the control group received intravenous (IV) morphine at the time of sheath removal. There was no difference between the control group and levobupivacaine group in pain scores at the time of sheath insertion. (2.0 +/- 0.4 versus 1.8 +/- 0.3; p = 0.80). Both groups recorded low pain scores while waiting for sheath removal, and the score was slightly (but not significantly) lower in the levobupivacaine group (1.3 +/- 0.2 versus 0.8 +/- 0.2; p = 0.09). Pain scores were lower in the levobupivacaine group during sheath removal 2.2 +/- 0.4 versus 1.1 +/- 0.2; p = 0.02). There were no differences in terms of blood pressure between the groups at any time point. CONCLUSIONS:Levobupivacaine reduced the need for IV opiate and provided better analgesia than lidocaine alone in patients undergoing PCI.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of long-acting local anesthetic (levobupivacaine) in addition to lidocaine for the management of femoral artery sheaths during and after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Femoral artery sheaths are commonly used during PCI. Sheath removal is often delayed after the procedure by which time short-acting local anesthetic agents may no longer be effective. METHODS: Sixty patients were randomized to either usual care or the administration of local levobupivacaine after PCI. Patients were asked to report their pain experienced on a visual analogue score. RESULTS: Thirty patients received additional levobupivacaine (0.5%) and 30 received standard care. There were no procedural differences between the groups, except that more patients in the control group received intravenous (IV) morphine at the time of sheath removal. There was no difference between the control group and levobupivacaine group in pain scores at the time of sheath insertion. (2.0 +/- 0.4 versus 1.8 +/- 0.3; p = 0.80). Both groups recorded low pain scores while waiting for sheath removal, and the score was slightly (but not significantly) lower in the levobupivacaine group (1.3 +/- 0.2 versus 0.8 +/- 0.2; p = 0.09). Pain scores were lower in the levobupivacaine group during sheath removal 2.2 +/- 0.4 versus 1.1 +/- 0.2; p = 0.02). There were no differences in terms of blood pressure between the groups at any time point. CONCLUSIONS:Levobupivacaine reduced the need for IV opiate and provided better analgesia than lidocaine alone in patients undergoing PCI.