Groban L, Deal D D, Vernon J C, James R L, Butterworth J
Department of Anesthesiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157-1009, USA.
Anesth Analg. 2000 Nov;91(5):1103-11. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200011000-00011.
It is unclear whether the mechanism of death from local anesthetic (LA) intoxication is primarily a consequence of cardiac arrhythmias or myocardial contractile depression, and whether LAs might differ in this susceptibility to these two mechanisms. By using programmable electrical stimulation (PES) protocols in anesthetized, ventilated dogs, we compared the arrhythmogenic potential of bupivacaine (BUP), ropivacaine (ROP), levobupivacaine (LBUP), and lidocaine (LIDO). Open-chest dogs were randomized to receive escalating incremental infusions of the four local anesthetics until cardiovascular collapse. We assumed a concentration relationship of 4:1 for LIDO/BUP, LBUP, and ROP. The effective refractory period did not change significantly until the dose increment corresponding to target concentrations of 8 and 32 microg/mL for BUP, LBUP, ROP, and LIDO, respectively. Thirty percent to 50% increases in effective refractory period occurred in surviving dogs at this dose. The incidence of spontaneous or PES-induced ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation did not differ among groups. Compared with LIDO, the incidence of PES-induced extrasystoles was more frequent for BUP- and LBUP-treated dogs (P: < 0.05). ROP-treated dogs did not differ from LIDO-treated dogs with respect to PES-induced extrasystoles. At the dose increment preceding cardiovascular collapse, all LAs produced significant increases in heart rate and reductions in blood pressure compared with their respective baseline values. The incidence of programmable electrical stimulation-induced ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation with BUP does not differ from the incidence that occurs with the single S:(-) enantiomers LBUP and ROP, providing further evidence against stereoselective arrhythmogenesis as a primary component of local anesthetic-induced cardiotoxicity.
Progressive bupivacaine intoxication in anesthetized, ventilated dogs does not produce early arrhythmogenic events. The incidence of programmable electrical stimulation-induced ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation with bupivacaine does not differ from the incidence that occurs with the single S:(-) enantiomers levobupivacaine and ropivacaine, providing further evidence against stereoselective arrhythmogenesis as a primary component of local anesthetic-induced cardiotoxicity.
局部麻醉药(LA)中毒导致死亡的机制主要是心律失常还是心肌收缩力抑制尚不清楚,以及不同局部麻醉药对这两种机制的易感性是否存在差异。通过在麻醉、通气的犬中使用可编程电刺激(PES)方案,我们比较了布比卡因(BUP)、罗哌卡因(ROP)、左旋布比卡因(LBUP)和利多卡因(LIDO)的致心律失常潜力。开胸犬被随机分组,接受四种局部麻醉药递增剂量的输注,直至出现心血管衰竭。我们假设利多卡因与布比卡因、左旋布比卡因和罗哌卡因的浓度关系为4:1。在分别对应于布比卡因、左旋布比卡因、罗哌卡因和利多卡因目标浓度8和32μg/mL的剂量增加之前,有效不应期没有显著变化。在此剂量下,存活犬的有效不应期增加了30%至50%。各组自发或PES诱导的室性心动过速和室颤的发生率没有差异。与利多卡因相比,布比卡因和左旋布比卡因治疗的犬中PES诱导的期前收缩发生率更高(P:<0.05)。罗哌卡因治疗的犬与利多卡因治疗的犬在PES诱导的期前收缩方面没有差异。在心血管衰竭前的剂量增加时,与各自的基线值相比,所有局部麻醉药均使心率显著增加,血压降低。布比卡因诱导的可编程电刺激引起的室性心动过速和颤动的发生率与单一S:(-)对映体左旋布比卡因和罗哌卡因引起的发生率没有差异,这进一步证明立体选择性心律失常并非局部麻醉药诱导心脏毒性的主要组成部分。
麻醉、通气犬中布比卡因的渐进性中毒不会引发早期心律失常事件。布比卡因诱导的可编程电刺激引起的室性心动过速和颤动的发生率与单一S:(-)对映体左旋布比卡因和罗哌卡因引起的发生率没有差异,这进一步证明立体选择性心律失常并非局部麻醉药诱导心脏毒性的主要组成部分。