Comparison of the clinical effects of intrathecal ropivacaine and bupivacaine in geriatric patients undergoing transurethral resection

Amaç: Bu çalışma transuretral girişim yapılacak yaşlı olgularda intratekal ropivakain ile intratekal bupivakain'in spinal anestezide yeterlilik ve emniyetini karşılaştırmak üzere planlandı. Materyal ve Metot: Trasuretral girişim geçirecek 65 yaş üstü ASA I ile III arası 60 olgu intratekal lokal anestezik uygulanmak üzere randomize olarak iki gruba ayrıldı. Grup R (n=30) 3 mL ropivakain 7,5 mg mL-1 (22,5 mg) ve Grup B (n=30) 3 mL bupivakain 5 mg mL-1 (15 mg) uygulandı. Duyusal bloğun TlO'a ulaşma, iki segment gerileme ve TlO'a gerileme zamanı, motor bloğun sonlanma zamanı, hemodinamik parametreler, postoperatif analjezik gereksinimi ve yan etkiler kaydedildi. Bulgular: Duyusal bloğun TlO'a ulaşma zamanı, iki segment gerileme ve TlO'a gerileme zamanı, Grup R ve Grup B'de benzerdi. Motor bloğun sonlanma zamanı açısından iki grup arasında fark yoktu. Ortalama arteriel basmç (MAP), kalp hızı (HR) ve parsiyel oksijen saturasyonu (SpO2) iki grupta da zaman dilimlerinde benzerdi. îki grup yan etkiler açısından karşılaştırıldığında bradikardi insidansı Grup R'de Grup B'ye göre anlanlı derecede düşük bulundu. Hiçbir olguda nörolojik probleme rastlanmadı. Sonuç: Transuretral girişim geçirecek yaşlı olgularda intratekal uygulanan 22,5 mg ropivakain ve 15 mg bupivakainin her ikisi de iyi tolere edildi ve yeterli blok sağlandı. Yaşlı olgulardaintratekal ropivakain'in intratekal bupivakain kadar etkili ve emniyetli olduğu sonucuna varıldı.

Transuretral girişim geçirecek yaşlı olgularda intratekal ropivakainve bupivakain'in klinik etkilerinin karşılaştırılması

Purpose: This study was designed to compare the efficiency and safety of intrathecal ropivacaine with intrathecal bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia in geriatric patients undergoing transurethral resection. Materials and Methods: Sixty patients, ASA I to III, over 65 years and scheduled for transurethral resection were randomized to receive an intrathecal injection of one of two local anesthetic solutions. Group R (n=30) • received 3 mL of ropivacaine 7.5 mg mL-1 (22.5 mg) and Group B (n=30) received 3 mL of bupivacaine 5 mg mL-1(15 mg). The onset time for sensorial blockade to T10, time to two segment regression of sensorial blockade, time to regression to T10 of sensorial blockade, offset time of motor blockade, hemodynamic parameters, postoperative analgesic requirement time, and side effects were recorded. Results: The onset time for sensorial blockade at T10, time to two segment regression of sensorial blockade and time to regression to T10 of sensorial blockade were similar in Group R and Group B. The offset time of motor blockade did not differ between the two groups. The variations in mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) in the course of time were similar in the groups. When the side effects of the two groups were compared, bradycardia was found to be significantly lower in Group R than in Group B. No neurological problems were observed in any patients. Conclusions: Intrathecal administration of either ropivacaine 22.5 mg or bupivacaine 15 mg was well tolerated and an adequate block for transurethral resection was achieved in geriatric patients. Intrathecal ropivacaine is as effective and safe as intrathecal bupivacaine in geriatric patients.

PDF

___

1. Milligan KR. Recent advances in local anaesthetics for spinal anaesthesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2004; 21: 837-847.
2. Malinovsky JM, Charles F, Kick O, Lepage JY, Malinge M, Cozian A, Bouchot O, Pinaud M. Intrathecal anesthesia: ropivacaine versus bupivacaine. AnesthAnalg. 2000; 91: 1457-1460.
3. Kuusniemi KS, Pihlajamaki KK, Pitkanen MT, Helenius HY, Kirvela OA. The use of bupivacaine and fentanyl for spinal anesthesia for urologic surgery. AnesthAnalg. 2000; 91:1452-146.
4. Wille M. Intrathecal use of ropivacaine: a review. Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2004; 55: 251-259.
5. Reiz S, Haggmark S, Johansson G, Nath S. Cardiotoxicity of ropivacaine - a new local anaesthetic agent. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1989; 33: 93-98.
6. 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: 563-569.
7. Polley LS, Columb MO, Naughton NN, Wagner DS, van de Ven CJM.Relative analgesic potencies of ropivacaine and bupivacaine for epidural analgesia in labor: implications for therapeutic indexes. Anesthesiology 2000; 92: 286-287.
8. Markham A, Faulds D. Ropivacaine. A review of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in regional anaesthesia. Drugs 1996; 52: 429-449.
9. McNamee DA, Parks L, McClelland AM, Scott S, Milligan KR, Ahlen K, Gustafsson U. Intrathecal ropivacaine for total hip arthroplasty: double-blind comparative study with isobaric 7.5 mg mL-1 and 10 mg mL-1 solutions. Br J Anaesth. 2001; 87: 743-747.
10. Van Kleef JW, Veering BT, Burm AG. Spinal anesthesia with ropivacaine: a doubleblind study on the efficacy and safety of 0.5% and 0.75% solutions in patients undergoing minor lower limb surgery. Anesth Analg."l994;78: 1125-1130.
11. Whiteside JB, Wildsmith JA. Developments in local anaesthetic drugs. Br J Anaesth. 2001; 87: 27-35.
12. Wahedi W, Nolte H, Klein P. Ropivacaine for spinal anesthesia. A dose-finding study. Anaesthesist 1996; 45: 737-744.
13. Gautier PE, De Kock M, Van Steenberge A, Poth N, Lahaye-Goffart B, Fanard L, Hody JL. Intrathecal ropivacaine for ambulatory surgery. Anesthesiology 1999; 91: 1239-1245.
14. McNamee DA, McClelland AM, Scott S, Milligan KR, Westman L, Gustafsson U. Spinal anaesthesia: comparison of plain ropivacaine 5 mg mL-1 with bupivacaine 5 mg mL-1 for major orthopaedic surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2002; 89: 702-706.
15. McDonald SB, Liu SS, Kopacz DJ, Stephenson CA. Hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine: a comparison to bupivacaine in volunteers. Anesthesiology 1999; 90:971-977.
16. Ganapathy S, Sandhu HB, Stockall CA, Hurley D. Transient neurologic symptom (TNS) following intrathecal ropivacaine. Anesthesiology 2000; 93: 1537-1539.
17. Khaw KS, Ngan Kee WD, Wong M, Ng F, Lee A. Spinal ropivacaine for cesarean delivery: a comparison of hyperbaric and plain solutions. Anesth Analg. 2002; 94: 680-685.
18. Ogun CO, Kirgiz EN, Duman A, Okesli S, Akyurek C. Comparison of intrathecal isobaric bupivacaine-morphine and ropivacainemorphine for Caesarean delivery. Br J Anaesth. 2003; 90: 659-664.
19. Chung CJ, Choi SR, Yeo KH, Park HS, Lee SI, Chin YJ. Hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine for cesarean delivery: a comparison to hyperbaric bupivacaine. Anesth Analg. 2001; 93: 157-611.