Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:58:39.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Levobupivacaine 0.25% compared with ropivacaine 0.25% by the caudal route in children

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2005

M. Astuto ,
N. Disma  and
C. Arena
M. Astuto
Affiliation:
Policlinico Universitario, Department of Anaesthesia, Catania, Italy
N. Disma
Affiliation:
Policlinico Universitario, Department of Anaesthesia, Catania, Italy
C. Arena
Affiliation:
Policlinico Universitario, Department of Paediatric Surgery, Catania, Italy
Get access

Extract

Summary

Background and objective: Levobupivacaine is the most recently introduced local anaesthetic into clinical practice. In a randomized double-blinded study, the onset, intraoperative tolerance, postoperative analgesic effect, motor blockade and any adverse reactions produced by levobupivacaine were compared with ropivacaine.

Methods: Sixty children, ASA I–II, 2–6 yr old, undergoing elective minor surgery, received a single caudal injection of 1 mL kg−1 of either levobupivacaine 0.25% or ropivacaine 0.25%. Caudal blocks were performed after induction of inhalation general anaesthesia using sevoflurane; anaesthesia was maintained via a laryngeal mask airway using a mixture of sevoflurane, oxygen and air.

Results: Onset time, intraoperative tolerance, postoperative analgesic effect and motor blockade were comparable between the two groups. The mean onset of the block was 8.2 ± 2.2 min for levobupivacaine and 8.5 ± 3.0 min for ropivacaine (P = 0.66). Additional analgesics during operation were not required in any of the children. No significant difference was found for mean time to requirement of additional analgesia with rectal acetaminophen (paracetamol) (302 ± 29 min for the levobupivacaine group and 230 ± 38 min for the ropivacaine group (P = 0.32)). During the first 4 h after placement of caudal block, the pain assessment score (according to the Children Hospital Eastern Ontario Pain Scale) was comparable for the two groups. No motor block was observed in any group on awakening, nor during the observation period.

Conclusions: We conclude that levobupivacaine 0.25% 1 mL kg−1 provides caudal block of comparable onset and duration, as produced by the same volume and concentration of ropivacaine.

Keywords

ANAESTHESIA, paediatricANAESTHETIC TECHNIQUES, regional, caudalANAESTHETICS, LOCAL, levobupivacaine, ropivacainePAIN, POSTOPERATIVE
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 20 , Issue 10 , November 2003 , pp. 826 - 830
Copyright
© 2003 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Giaufre E, Dalens B, Gombert A. Epidemiology and morbidity of regional anesthesia in children: a 1-yr prospective survey of the French-Language Society of Pediatric Anesthesiologists. Anesth Analg 1996; 83: 904–912.Google Scholar
Knudsen K, Beckman Suurkula M, Blomberg S, Sjovall J, Edvardsson N. Central nervous and cardiovascular effects of i.v. infusions of ropivacaine, bupivacaine and placebo in volunteers. Br J Anaesth 1997; 78: 507–514.Google Scholar
Ivani G, Lampugnani E, Torre M, et al. Comparison of ropivacaine with bupivacaine for paediatric caudal block. Br J Anaesth 1998; 81: 247–248.Google Scholar
Foster RH, Markham A. Levobupivacaine: a review of its pharmacology and use as a local anaesthetic. Drugs 2000; 59: 551–579.Google Scholar
Huang YF, Pryor ME, Mather LE, Veering BT. Cardiovascular and central nervous system effects of intravenous levobupivacaine and bupivacaine in sheep. Anesth Analg 1998; 86: 797–804.Google Scholar
Denson DD, Behbehani MM, Greeg RV. Enantiomer-specific effects of an intravenously administered arrhythmogenic dose of bupivacaine on neurons of the nucleus tractus solitarius and the cardiovascular system in the anesthetized rat. Reg Anesth 1992; 17: 311–316.Google Scholar
Bardsley H, Gristwood R, Baker H, Watson N, Nimmo W. A comparison of the cardiovascular effects of levobupivacaine and rac-bupivacaine following intravenous administration to healthy volunteers. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1998; 46: 245–249.Google Scholar
Dalens B. Pediatric Local and Regional Anesthesia: From Birth to Adulthood. Baltimore, USA: Williams and Wilkins, 1996: 55–65.
McGrath PJ, Johnson G, Goodman JT, et al. In: Fields HL, Dubner R, Cervero F (eds). The CHEOPS. A Behavioral Scale to Measure Postoperative Pain in Children. New York, USA: Raven Press, 1985: 395–402.
Bromage PR. A comparison of the hydrochloride and carbon dioxide salt of lidocaine and prilocaine in epidural analgesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1965; 16 (Suppl): 55–69.Google Scholar
Kopacz DJ, Allen HW, Thompson GE. A comparison of epidural levobupivacaine 0.75% with racemic bupivacaine for lower abdominal surgery. Anesth Analg 2000; 90: 642–648.Google Scholar
Murdoch JA, Dickson UK, Wilson PA, Berman JS, Gad-Elrab RR, Scott NB. The efficacy and safety of three concentrations of levobupivacaine administered as a continuous epidural infusion in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. Anesth Analg 2002; 94: 438–444.Google Scholar
Ivani G, DeNegri P, Conio A, et al. Comparison of racemic bupivacaine, ropivacaine and levo-bupivacaine for pediatric caudal anesthesia: effects on postoperative analgesia and motor block. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2002; 27: 157–161.Google Scholar
Casati A, Borghi B, Fanelli G, et al. A double-blinded, randomized comparison of either 0.5% levobupivacaine or 0.5% ropivacaine for sciatic nerve block. Anesth Analg 2002; 94: 987–990.Google Scholar
Polley LS, Columb MO, Naughton NN, Wagner DS, van de Ven CJ. Relative analgesic potencies of ropivacaine and bupivacaine for epidural analgesia in labor: implications for therapeutic indexes. Anesthesiology 1999; 90: 944–950.Google Scholar
Lyons G, Columb M, Wilson RC, Johnson RV. Epidural pain relief in labour: potencies of levobupivacaine and racemic bupivacaine. Br J Anaesth 1998; 81: 899–901.Google Scholar
Dony P, Dewinde V, Vanderick B, et al. The comparative toxicity of ropivacaine and bupivacaine at equipotent doses in rats. Anesth Analg 2000; 91: 1489–1492.Google Scholar
Aya AGM, de La Coussaye JE, Robert E, et al. Comparison of the effects of racemic bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, and ropivacaine on ventricular conduction, refractoriness, and wavelength. An epicardial mapping study. Anesthesiology 2002; 96: 641–650.Google Scholar