Literature DB >> 20668826

Hyperbaric levobupivacaine in anal surgery : Spinal perianal and spinal saddle blocks.

Z Kazak1, P Ekmekci, K Kazbek.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: An ideal anesthetic technique for anal surgery on an outpatient basis should permit early mobilization without pain or residual complications of anesthesia. The aim of this study was to analyze the reliability and efficacy of spinal perianal and spinal saddle block by using two different doses of levobupivacaine for perianal surgery and their effects on voiding, first analgesic requirement and hospital discharge times.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was conducted on 78 ASA I-II patients scheduled for elective perianal surgery. Patients were randomized into two groups, the spinal perianal group and the spinal saddle group. Hyperbaric levobupivacaine 1.5 mg (perianal) or 6 mg (saddle) was administered intrathecally through the L4-5 intervertebral space by a 25-gauge Whitacre spinal needle with the patient in the sitting position. Sensory block was evaluated using a surgical toothless clamp until satisfactory block reached the S4 sensory level and motor block was evaluated using a modified Bromage scale. Patient and surgeon satisfaction were recorded for each patient. Ambulation, voiding and hospital discharge times were assessed.
RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the two groups demographically. Perianal low dose levobupivacaine use resulted in no motor block (Bromage=0, p=0.006) and a sensory block limited to the S4 level. The low and conventional doses of levobupivacaine provided sufficient anesthesia during the surgical procedures. The sensory block regression time in the perianal block group was shorter than the saddle group (p=0.048). Time to first analgesic requirement was significantly longer in the saddle block group (p<0.05). The times of first ambulation, the first voiding and hospital discharge in patients with the perianal block were significantly shorter than patients in the saddle block (p<0.05, p<0.01, p<0.05, respectively).
CONCLUSION: The results of the study showed that the use of 1.5 mg hyperbaric levobupivacaine provides sufficient and satisfactory anesthesia in ambulatory perianal surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20668826     DOI: 10.1007/s00101-010-1755-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaesthesist        ISSN: 0003-2417            Impact factor:   1.041


  13 in total

1.  Correction factor for comparisons between levobupivacaine and racemic bupivacaine.

Authors:  S A Schug
Journal:  Reg Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2001 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 6.288

2.  Selective spinal anesthesia: a comparison of hyperbaric bupivacaine 4 mg versus 6 mg for outpatient knee arthroscopy.

Authors:  J V Valanne; A M Korhonen; R M Jokela; P Ravaska; K K Korttila
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 5.108

3.  Restricting spinal block to the operative side: why not?

Authors:  Andrea Casati; Guido Fanelli
Journal:  Reg Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 6.288

4.  Anesthesia for outpatient knee arthroscopy: is there an optimal technique?

Authors:  Terese T Horlocker; James R Hebl
Journal:  Reg Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2003 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 6.288

5.  Spinal perianal block: a prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison with spinal saddle block.

Authors:  Medhat R Wassef; Emil I Michaels; Jeffrey M Rangel; Arkadiy T Tsyrlin
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 5.108

6.  A comparison of the electrocardiographic cardiotoxic effects of racemic bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, and ropivacaine in anesthetized swine.

Authors:  S G Morrison; J J Dominguez; P Frascarolo; S Reiz
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.108

7.  A comparison of the cardiovascular effects of levobupivacaine and rac-bupivacaine following intravenous administration to healthy volunteers.

Authors:  H Bardsley; R Gristwood; H Baker; N Watson; W Nimmo
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 4.335

8.  Levobupivacaine versus racemic bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia.

Authors:  Christian Glaser; Peter Marhofer; Gabriela Zimpfer; Marie T Heinz; Christian Sitzwohl; Stephan Kapral; Ingrid Schindler
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 5.108

9.  Spinal anaesthesia for elective surgery: a comparison of hyperbaric solutions of racemic bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, and ropivacaine.

Authors:  J F Luck; P D W Fettes; J A W Wildsmith
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2008-09-02       Impact factor: 9.166

10.  Levobupivacaine versus racemic bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for urological surgery.

Authors:  Y Y Lee; K Muchhal; C K Chan
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.669

View more
  2 in total

1.  Retrospective analysis of mepivacaine, prilocaine and chloroprocaine for low-dose spinal anaesthesia in outpatient perianal procedures.

Authors:  Volker Gebhardt; Kevin Kiefer; Dieter Bussen; Christel Weiss; Marc D Schmittner
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2018-05-13       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Intrathecal dexmedetomidine as adjuvant for spinal anaesthesia for perianal ambulatory surgeries: A randomised double-blind controlled study.

Authors:  S S Nethra; M Sathesha; Aanchal Dixit; Pradeep A Dongare; S S Harsoor; D Devikarani
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2015-03
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.