Paech M J
Department of Anaesthesia, St Helen's Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand.
Anaesth Intensive Care. 1988 May;16(2):187-96. doi: 10.1177/0310057X8801600210.
Thirty-eight women having caesarean section under epidural anaesthesia received either lignocaine 2% or bupivacaine 0.5% both with adrenaline 1:200,000 in a double-blind, randomised study. The time to establish satisfactory surgical anaesthesia, the volume required and the quality of analgesia as assessed by the anaesthetist, patient pain and discomfort scales and patient approval, were not significantly different. Motor block assessed by the Bromage and RAM-test was greater in the lignocaine group but surgical opinion of abdominal wall relaxation was not significantly different between groups. The bupivacaine group had significantly longer durations of sensory and motor block while the lignocaine group had a higher incidence of maternal shivering, other complication rates being similar. Neonatal outcomes were uniformly good. Both local anaesthetics provided satisfactory epidural anaesthesia and neither proved to have a distinct advantage in the clinical setting of this study.
在一项双盲随机研究中,38名接受硬膜外麻醉进行剖宫产的女性,分别接受了含1:200,000肾上腺素的2%利多卡因或0.5%布比卡因。麻醉师评估的建立满意手术麻醉的时间、所需容量和镇痛质量,以及患者疼痛和不适量表及患者满意度,均无显著差异。通过布罗梅奇评分和RAM试验评估的运动阻滞在利多卡因组中更明显,但两组间腹壁松弛的手术评估无显著差异。布比卡因组的感觉和运动阻滞持续时间明显更长,而利多卡因组产妇寒战发生率更高,其他并发症发生率相似。新生儿结局均良好。两种局部麻醉药均提供了满意的硬膜外麻醉,在本研究的临床环境中,两者均未显示出明显优势。