Issn Print: 0265-0215

Publication Date: 2006/06/01


Print

Spinal anaesthesia using hyperbaric 0.75% ropivacaine vs hyperbaric 0.5% bupivacaine for elective caesarean section: A-686

T. Kasza; P. Knapik; H. Misiolek; D. Knapik

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Excerpt

Background and Goal of Study: Spinal anaesthesia produced with ropivacaine (R) and morphine is proved to be as effective and safe as that provided by bupivacaine (B) and morphine for caesarean section, with an earlier recovery of sensory and motor functions [1]. Our study aimed to answer the question whether hyperbaric plain R is different to hyperbaric plain B in this setting.
Materials and Methods: After Ethical Committee approval and informed consent, 75 patients scheduled for elective caesarean section were randomly allocated into group R and group B. Group R (n = 36) received intrathecally 2 mls of hyperbaric 0.75% R, while group B (n = 39) received intrathecally 2 mls of hyperbaric 0.5% R. Profile of sensory and motor block as well as cardiovascular effects were compared between the groups. Mann Whitney test, ANOVA with post-hoc Scheffe test and two-tailed Fischer test were used when appropriate. p < 0.05 was considered significant.
Results and Discussions: Onset of sensory and motor block was comparable in R and B group (6.1 ± 1.1 vs 6.4 ± 1.4min. and 10.4 ± 2.2 vs 11.2 ± 2.6 min., respectively). Duration of sensory blockade was also similar (129 ± 29 min. for R and 130 ± 24 min. for B) - similar results were found in the duration of motor bockade (79 ± 13min. for R vs 78 ± 17min. for B). Mean values of blood pressure and heart rate were comparable between the groups. Five patients in R group (13.9%) and five patients in B group (12.8%) were given ephedrine because of arterial hypotension.
Conclusion: Plain ropivacaine 0.75% is fully comparable to plain bupivacaine 0.5% during spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean section.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles