Nihat BALİ, Haktan KARAMAN, Adnan TÜFEK, Gönül Ölmez KAVAK, Zeynep Baysal YILDIRIM, Mustafa CENGİZ

Preeklamptik gebe kadınlarda intratekal olarak uygulanan levobupivakain ve bupivakainin etkinliğinin karşılaştırılması

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, spinal anestezi ile sezaryen ameliyatı olacak preeklamptik gebelerde, levobupivakain ve bupivakainin etkinlik ve yan etki bakımından karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve yöntem: Prospektif randomize olarak planlanan bu çalışmaya; Preeklampsi tanısı almış ve spinal anestezi ile sezaryen ameliyatı olacak 18-45 yaş arası hastalar alındı. Hastalar rastgele iki gruba ayrıldılar; Grup B’ye 2 mL % 0.5 bupivakain (10 mg), Grup L’ ye ise 2 mL % 0.5 levobupivakain (10 mg) intratekal olarak uygulandı. Hastaların noninvaziv kan basınçları ve kalp atım hızları, spinal anestezi öncesi, işlem sonrası 3, 6, 9, 12, 15. dakikalarda ve sonrasında ise her 5 dakikada bir olacak şekilde operasyon sonuna kadar ölçülerek kaydedildi. Değerlendirmeler, gruplar arası hasta ve cerrah memnuniyetinin karşılaştırılması ile yapıldı. Puanlamada vizüel analog skor (VAS) kullanıldı. Bulgular: Spinal anestezi sonrası gruplar arasında 3, 15, 35 ve 40. dakikalardaki ortalama sistolik arter basınç değerleri Grup B’de istatistiksel olarak anlamlı düşük bulunurken (p0.05). Sonuç: Preeklamptik gebelerde spinal anestezi uygulamalarında kullanılan her iki lokal anesteziğin de yeterince kaliteli cerrahi anestezi sağlamakla birlikte, levobupivakainin daha stabil bir hemodinami oluşturduğu saptandı.

Comparison of the efficacy of intrathecally administered levobupivacaine and bupivacaine in pre-eclamptic pregnant women

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of levobupivacaine and bupivacaine in pre-eclamptic patients that will undergo caesarean section by spinal anesthesia. Materials and methods: Preeclamptic, 18-45 years-old patients that will undergo a caesarean section were included in the study in a prospective randomized manner. They were separated into two groups: Group B, intrathecally received 2 mL 0.5% bupivacaine (10 mg), while Group L intrathecally received 2 mL 0.5% levobupivacaine (10 mg). Blood pressure and heart rates of the patients were measured and recorded at 3, 6, 9, 12, 15th minutes and thereafter, every 5 minutes during operation. The evaluations were done through the comparison of patient’s and surgeon’s satisfaction between the groups. Visual analog score (VAS) was used for comparison. Results: Systolic arterial pressure values at 3, 15, 35 and 40th minutes in Group B were significantly lower than those in Group R (p<0.05), no significant difference was found in heart rates. Group B more frequently developed hypotension (10 patients versus 15 patients), so significantly greater amount efedrin was needed to treat hypotension (p=0.012). Patient satisfaction was recorded high in favor of Group L (p=0.011), however no difference was found in surgeon satisfaction between two groups (p>0.05). Conclusion: Intrathecal levobupivacaine for spinal anesthesia ensured a more stable hemodynamics but both local anesthesia enabled a sufficient and adequate surgical anesthesia in pre-eclamptic patients.

PDF

___

1. Report of the national high blood pressure education program working group on high blood pressure in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 183: 1-22.
2. Sibai BM. Hypertansion in pregnancy. In: Gabbe SG, Niebly JR, Simpson JL, eds. Obstetrics: Normal and problem pregnancies, 3rd edn. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1996, 935–996.
3. Duley L. Maternal mortality associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 99: 547-553.
4. Gogarten W. Preeclampsia and anaesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2009; 22: 347-351.
5. Saftlas AF, Olson DR, Franks AL, Atrash HK, Pokras R. Epidemiology of preeclampsia and eclampsia in the United States, 1979-1986. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 163: 460-465.
6. Roberts JM, Redman CW. Pre-eclampsia: more than pregnancy-induced hypertension. Lancet 1993; 341: 1447-1451.
7. Leeman L, Fontaine P. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Am Fam Physician 2008; 78: 93-100.
8. Börekçi B, Aksoy H, Öztürk N, Kadanalı S. Correlation between calprotectin and oxidized LDL in preeclampsia. Turk J Med Sci 2009; 39: 191-195.
9. Noyan T, Sekeroglu MR, Dülger H, Kamacı M. Preeklampsi ve sağlıklı gebelerde lipit peroksidasyonu ve antioksidan durum. Türkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci 2002; 22: 461–465.
10. Wacker J, Werner P, Walter-Sack I, Bastert G. Treatment of hypertension in patients with pre-eclampsia: a prospective parallel-group study comparing dihydralazine with urapidil. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1998; 13: 318-325.
11.Al-Mulhim AA, Abu-Heija A, Al-Jamma F, El-Harith el-HA. Pre-eclampsia: maternal risk factors and perinatal outcome. Fetal Diagn Ther 2003; 18: 275-280.
12. Öz H, Akkor A, Aykaç B, Sun S. Preeklampsi-eklampside anestezi ve yoğun bakım. Perinatoloji Dergisi 1993; 1: 50-54.
13. Mandal NG, Surapaneni S. Regional anaesthesia in pre-eclampsia: advantages and disadvantages. Drugs 2004; 64: 223-236.
14. Gristwood RW. Cardiac and CNS toxicity of levobupivacaine: strengths of evidence for advantage over bupivacaine. Drug Saf 2002; 25: 153-163.
15.Cox GR, Faccenda KA, Gilhooly C, Bannister J, Scott NB, Morrisson LMM. Extradural S (-)-bupivacaine: comparison with racemic RS-bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth 1998; 80: 289-293.
16. Morgan GE, Mikail MS. Clinical Anesthesiology, 2nd edn. New York: Appleton&Lange, 1996; 200–211.
17. Erdine S. Rejyonal Anestezi. İstanbul: Nobel Matbaacılık, 2005:159-179.
18. Dündar Ö, Yörük P, Tütüncü L, Ergür AR, Atay V, Müngen E. Preeklampsinin konservatif tedavisinde metoprolol ve nifedipin kullanımının karşılaştırılması. Perinatoloji Dergisi 2008; 16: 19-25.
19. Van de Velde M, Dreelinck R, Dubois J, et al. Determination of the full dose–response relation of intrathecal bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, and ropivacaine, combined with sufentanil, for labor analgesia. Anesthesiology 2007; 106:149-156.
20. Camorcia M, Capogna G, Columb MO. Minimum local analgesic doses of ropivacaine, levobupivacaine, and bupivacaine for intrathecal labor analgesia. Anesthesiology 2005; 102: 646-650.
21. Gautier P, De Kock M, Huberty L, Demir T, Izydorczic M, Vanderick B. Comparison of the effects of intrathecal ropivacaine, evobupivacaine, and bupivacaine for Caesarean section. Br J Anaesth 2003; 91: 684-689.
22. Aya AG, Mangin R, Vialles N, et al. Patients with severe preeclampsia experience less hypotension during spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery than healthy parturients: A Prospective cohort comparison. Anesth Analg 2003; 97: 867–872.
23. Riley ET, Ratner EF, Cohen SE. Intrathecal sufentanil for labor analgesia: do sensory changes predict better analgesia and greater hypotension? Anesth Analg 1997; 84: 346-351.
24. Ulukaya S, Alper I, Bayraktaroğlu E, Balcıoğlu T, Uyar M. İzobarik formlarda levobupivakain ve bupivakain ile spinal anestezi uygulaması. Türk Anest Rean Der Dergisi 2009; 37: 152-158.
25. Hawkins JL, Arens JE, Bucklin BA, et al. Practice guidelines for obstetric anesthesia: A report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists task force on obstetrical anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1999; 90: 600–611.
26. Stamer UM, Stuber F, Wiese R, Wulf H, Meuser T. Contraindications to regional anaesthesia in obstetrics: a survey of German practice. Int J Obstet Anesth 2007; 16: 328-335.
27. Koyama S, Tomimatsu T, Kanagawa T, et al. Spinal subarachnoid hematoma following spinal anesthesia in a patient with HELLP syndrome. Int J Obstet Anesth 2010; 19: 87-91.