A comparison between 0.25% bupivacaine and 0.25% ropivacaine in caudal anaesthesia in paediatric patients undergoing lower abdominal surgeries

Darshana Kumbhre, R. K. Jain

Abstract


Aims and Objectives: The present study was undertaken to compare the onset time, duration of action of sensory and motor blockade and postoperative pain relief between 0.25% bupivacaine and 0.25% ropivacaine in caudal block for children undergoing lower abdominal surgeries.

Method: In a double blind study, 50 patients of (age 2-8 years) ASA grade I and II were randomly allocated in two equal groups to received 0.75ml/ kg of either 0.25% bupivacaine (Group I) or 0.25% ropivacaine (Group II) via caudal epidural route. Caudal block was performed in all patients after induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane and oxygen. All the results were tabulated and analyzed statistically. For all statistical analysis, the level of significance was P < 0.05.

Results: There were statistically no significant difference between the groups, in respect of quality of sensory block and quality of motor block (p > 0.05). The duration of motor block in group ‘I’ was 142.2±27.77 minutes while in group ‘II’ it was 120.6±23.51 minutes (p<0.05). The mean duration of pain relief was 241.76±55.62 minutes in group ‘I’ compared with 238.2 ±62.05 minutes in group ‘II’ (p>0.05). The mean pain score of patients in both groups were comparable.

Conclusion: Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine provides almost similar duration of pain relief postoperatively but ropivacaine provides less motor blockade as compared to bupivacaine, making it a suitable agent for day care surgery with increase safety margin particularly in younger children.


Keywords


Caudal block, Ropivacaine, Bupivacaine, Sevoflurane, Sensory block, Motor block

Full Text:

PDF

References


. Frank HK. The society of Paediatric Anaesthesia: 15th annual meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana. Anaesthesia Aanalgesia. 2002; 94:1661-8.

. Finley GA, Mc Granth PJ, Forward SP, et al. Parents management of children pain following “minor” surgery. Pain. 1996; 64:83-7.

. Kaushal D, Singh V, Abbas H, Mallik A, Singh G. Caudal bupivacaine-neostigmine for perioperative analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing infraumbilical surgeries: A prospective, randomized, double blind, controlled study. The Internet J. Anesth. 2008; (21)1.

. Laha A, Ghosh S, Das H. Comparison of caudal analgesia between ropivacaine and ropivacaine with clonidine in children: A randomized controlled trial. Saudi J. Anesth. 2012; 6: 197-200.

. Deng XM, Xiao WJ, Tang GZ, Luo MP, Xu KL. The minimum local anesthetic concentration of ropivacaine for caudal analgesia in children. Anesth Analg. 2002; 94:1465-8.

. Gehdoo RP. Post Operative Pain Management in Paediatric Patients. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2004; 48: 406-411.

. Spiegel P. Caudal anaesthesia in pediatric surgery: a preliminary report. Anaesthesia Analgesia. 1962; 41: 218-221.

. Kay B. Caudal block for post-operative pain relief in children. Anaesthesia. 1974; 29: 610-611.

. Hassan SZ. Caudal anaesthesia in infants. Anaesthesia Analgesia. 1977; 56: 686-689.

. McGown RG. Caudal analgesia in children. Five hundred cases for procedures below the diaphragm. Anaesthesia. 1982; 37: 806-818.

. Pain terms: a list with definitions and notes on usage. Recommended by the IASP Subcommittee on Taxonomy. Pain. 1979; 6: 249.

. McClure JH. Ropivacaine. Br J Anaesth 1996; 76:300-7.

. McClellan KJ, Faulds D. Ropivacaine: An update of its use in regional anaesthesia. Drugs 2000; 60:1065-93.

. Scott DB, Lee A, Fagan D, Bowler GM, Bloomfield P, Lundh R. Acute toxicity of ropivacaine compared with that of bupivacaine. Anesth Analg 1989; 69:563-9.

. Ray M, Mondal SK, Biswas A. Caudal analgesia in paediatric patients: Comparison between bupivacaine and ropivacaine. Indian J Anaesth 2003; 47:275-8.

. Karmakar MK, Aun CS, Wong EL, Wong AS, Chan SK, Yeung CK. Ropivacaine undergoes slower systemic absorption from the caudal epidural space in children than bupivacaine. Anesth Analg 2002; 94:259-65.

. Choonara IA. Management of pain in newborn infants. Semin. Perinatol 1992; 16: 32-40.

. Markakis DA. Regional anaesthesia in pediatrics. Anesth Clinics of North America. 2000; 18: 355–381.

. Rowney DA, Doyle E. Epidural and subarachnoid blockade in children. Anaesthesia 1998; 58: 980-1001.

. Dalens B, Hasnaoui A. Caudal anesthesia in pediatric surgery: Success rate and adverse effects in 750 consecutive patients. Anesth Analg 1989; 68:83-9.

. Miller’s Anesthesia, 7th Edition, page no. 1616-1618.

. Breschan C, Jost R et al. A prospective study comparing the analgesic efficacy of levobupivacaine, ropivacaine and bupivacaine in pediatric patients undergoing caudal blockade. Pediatric Anesthesia 2005; 15:301-306.

. Da Conceicao MJ, Coelho L. Caudal anesthesia with 0.375% ropivacaine or 0.375% bupivacaine in paediatric patients. Br J Anaesth 1998; 80:507-508.

. Khalil S, Campos C et al. Caudal block in children, ropivacaine compared with bupivacaine. Anesthesiology 1999; 91.

. Omar Elsafty MD, Ahmed MS et al. Comparative study of ropivacaine versus bupivacaine for pediatric caudal block. The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine 2002; 8:88-93.

. Bramell RGB et al. Caudal block for postoperative epain relief in children. Anesthesia 1982; 37:1024-1028.

. Tan JS, Choo SM. Caudal ropivacaine versus bupivacaine for pediatric day case circumcision procedures. The Internet of Anaesthesiology 2004; 4(4).




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7439/ijbr.v8i11.4490

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2017 International Journal of Biomedical Research

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.