Cargando…
Comparative study of intrathecal hyperbaric versus isobaric ropivacaine: A randomized control trial
BACKGROUND: Hyperbaric ropivacaine produce more reliable sensory and motor block, with faster onset, better quality of muscles relaxation than isobaric ropivacaine. So, this study was designed to compare the efficacy of hyperbaric ropivacaine with isobaric ropivacaine in patients undergoing lower ab...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3757795/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24015125 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.115326 |
_version_ | 1782282269612834816 |
---|---|
author | Gupta, Rajni Bogra, Jaishri Singh, Prithvi Kumar Saxena, Sulekha Chandra, Girish Kushwaha, Jitendra Kumar |
author_facet | Gupta, Rajni Bogra, Jaishri Singh, Prithvi Kumar Saxena, Sulekha Chandra, Girish Kushwaha, Jitendra Kumar |
author_sort | Gupta, Rajni |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Hyperbaric ropivacaine produce more reliable sensory and motor block, with faster onset, better quality of muscles relaxation than isobaric ropivacaine. So, this study was designed to compare the efficacy of hyperbaric ropivacaine with isobaric ropivacaine in patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery. METHODS: A randomized controlled double blind study in two groups of patients. group A (n=35) received 3 ml of isobaric ropivacaine 6 mg/ml (18 mg). Group B (n=35) received 3 ml of hyperbaric ropivacaine 6 mg/ml (18 mg). The onset and duration of sensory block at dermatome level T10, maximum upper and lower spread of sensory block, intensity, and duration of motor block were recorded. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Block characteristics were compared using the two-tailed Mann – Whitney U-test. The proportion of side effects was compared using the Chi-square test. RESULTS: The median time of onset of sensory block at the T10 dermatome was 4.4±1.3 min in group B and 6.0±1.03 min in group A. The median time to maximum block height was 16.7±3.7 min in group A and 12.03±1.96 min in group B. The median duration of complete motor recovery (B0) was significantly shorter in the heavy ropivacaine group (166.5±11.7 min) compared with the isobaric ropivacaine group (192.9±9.6 min). CONCLUSIONS: Intrathecal hyperbaric ropivacaine provides more rapid, adequate, and good quality of sensory and motor block with rapid post-operative recovery as compare to isobaric ropivacaine. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3757795 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37577952013-09-06 Comparative study of intrathecal hyperbaric versus isobaric ropivacaine: A randomized control trial Gupta, Rajni Bogra, Jaishri Singh, Prithvi Kumar Saxena, Sulekha Chandra, Girish Kushwaha, Jitendra Kumar Saudi J Anaesth Original Article BACKGROUND: Hyperbaric ropivacaine produce more reliable sensory and motor block, with faster onset, better quality of muscles relaxation than isobaric ropivacaine. So, this study was designed to compare the efficacy of hyperbaric ropivacaine with isobaric ropivacaine in patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery. METHODS: A randomized controlled double blind study in two groups of patients. group A (n=35) received 3 ml of isobaric ropivacaine 6 mg/ml (18 mg). Group B (n=35) received 3 ml of hyperbaric ropivacaine 6 mg/ml (18 mg). The onset and duration of sensory block at dermatome level T10, maximum upper and lower spread of sensory block, intensity, and duration of motor block were recorded. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Block characteristics were compared using the two-tailed Mann – Whitney U-test. The proportion of side effects was compared using the Chi-square test. RESULTS: The median time of onset of sensory block at the T10 dermatome was 4.4±1.3 min in group B and 6.0±1.03 min in group A. The median time to maximum block height was 16.7±3.7 min in group A and 12.03±1.96 min in group B. The median duration of complete motor recovery (B0) was significantly shorter in the heavy ropivacaine group (166.5±11.7 min) compared with the isobaric ropivacaine group (192.9±9.6 min). CONCLUSIONS: Intrathecal hyperbaric ropivacaine provides more rapid, adequate, and good quality of sensory and motor block with rapid post-operative recovery as compare to isobaric ropivacaine. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2013 /pmc/articles/PMC3757795/ /pubmed/24015125 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.115326 Text en Copyright: © Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Gupta, Rajni Bogra, Jaishri Singh, Prithvi Kumar Saxena, Sulekha Chandra, Girish Kushwaha, Jitendra Kumar Comparative study of intrathecal hyperbaric versus isobaric ropivacaine: A randomized control trial |
title | Comparative study of intrathecal hyperbaric versus isobaric ropivacaine: A randomized control trial |
title_full | Comparative study of intrathecal hyperbaric versus isobaric ropivacaine: A randomized control trial |
title_fullStr | Comparative study of intrathecal hyperbaric versus isobaric ropivacaine: A randomized control trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative study of intrathecal hyperbaric versus isobaric ropivacaine: A randomized control trial |
title_short | Comparative study of intrathecal hyperbaric versus isobaric ropivacaine: A randomized control trial |
title_sort | comparative study of intrathecal hyperbaric versus isobaric ropivacaine: a randomized control trial |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3757795/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24015125 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.115326 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guptarajni comparativestudyofintrathecalhyperbaricversusisobaricropivacainearandomizedcontroltrial AT bograjaishri comparativestudyofintrathecalhyperbaricversusisobaricropivacainearandomizedcontroltrial AT singhprithvikumar comparativestudyofintrathecalhyperbaricversusisobaricropivacainearandomizedcontroltrial AT saxenasulekha comparativestudyofintrathecalhyperbaricversusisobaricropivacainearandomizedcontroltrial AT chandragirish comparativestudyofintrathecalhyperbaricversusisobaricropivacainearandomizedcontroltrial AT kushwahajitendrakumar comparativestudyofintrathecalhyperbaricversusisobaricropivacainearandomizedcontroltrial |