Suppr超能文献

[1%罗哌卡因与不含血管收缩剂的0.75%布比卡因。骨科手术中硬膜外麻醉的比较研究]

[Ropivacaine 1% versus bupivacaine 0.75% without a vasoconstrictor. A comparative study of epidural anesthesia in orthopedic surgery].

作者信息

Niesel H C, Eilingsfeld T, Hornung M, Kaiser H

机构信息

Anästhesie-Abteilung, St. Marienkrankenhaus, Ludwigshafen/Rhein.

出版信息

Anaesthesist. 1993 Sep;42(9):605-11.

PMID:8214532
Abstract

The long-acting local anaesthetic agent ropivacaine, S(-)-1-propyl-2',6'-pipecoloxylidid, is characterised by lower lipid solubility and lower cardiotoxicity compared with bupivacaine. This study was designed to evaluate its clinical efficacy and motor blocking properties when using lower volumes and higher concentrations of both plain substances. METHODS. In a randomised, double-blind study plain ropivacaine (ro) 1% (150 mg) and bupivacaine (bu) 0.75% (112.5 mg) were compared in 44 patients. In the lateral position, epidural anaesthesia was performed at L2/3 or L3/4 using the loss-of-resistance technique. A test dose of 3 ml was given followed by 12 ml (total volume 15 ml). Sensory blockade was registered by the pin-prick method after 2 min at 5-min intervals up to maximal levels and after the operation at 30-min intervals. Simultaneously, the motor block was determined by means of the Bromage scale. Results are given as median values. RESULTS. The onset of analgesia was 6.0 min for both substances (L2), the time to level L5 16.0 and 17.0 min, respectively. The median maximum upper level of sensory analgesia was achieved after 24.5 min with ro (Th 5) and after 21.0 min (Th 7) with bu. The maximum durations (regression to L2) were 321.5 (ro) and 266.0 min (bu) (P < 0.05). Times for 2-segment regression were comparable at 177.5 and 176.0 min, respectively, and for 4-segment regression at 201.3 and 222.0 min. Twenty-one of the 22 patients developed a first-degree motor block (latency 15 and 12 min); 16 patients in the ro group developed a second-degree block, as did 14 in the bu group (latency 24 and 22 min). Third-degree motor block was recorded in 3 patients (latency 45 and 38 min). The duration of first-degree motor block was 233 min and 207 min, of second-degree block 150 and 155 min, and third-degree block 135 min in both groups. The mean arterial pressures and heart rates did not differ. The diastolic pressures were lower after bu (-8.3%) than after ro (-0.4%) at 30 min. No major side effects were observed. Theodrenaline and/or dihydroergotamine (1:10 diluted) was administered to 38.6% of the patients; 34.1% received atropine for the treatment of bradycardias (decrease > or = 12%) and hypotension of more than 20%. No significant differences were found in frequency of analgesia (pin-prick) between both groups. One of 22 patients in the ro group and 6 of 22 in the bu group required additional analgesics or general anaesthesia. The difference is not statistically significant, but is of clinical relevance. With 2 patients after ro and 4 patients after bu the relaxation was insufficient for good operating conditions. CONCLUSION. Ropivacaine 1% produced a longer duration of analgesia and better clinical efficacy than bupivacaine 0.75%. The clinical difference in motor blockade was not statistically significant. The Bromage scale is not representative for a substance with good analgesic effects and moderate motor blocking properties, as has been shown in sophisticated studies on ropivacaine motor blockade.

摘要

长效局麻药物罗哌卡因,S(-)-1-丙基-2',6'-哌啶甲酰胺,与布比卡因相比,具有较低的脂溶性和较低的心脏毒性。本研究旨在评估使用较低容量和较高浓度的两种药物时其临床疗效及运动阻滞特性。方法:在一项随机、双盲研究中,对44例患者比较了1%(150mg)的普通罗哌卡因(ro)和0.75%(112.5mg)的布比卡因(bu)。患者取侧卧位,采用阻力消失法于L2/3或L3/4行硬膜外麻醉。先给予3ml试验剂量,随后给予12ml(总量15ml)。采用针刺法在给药后2分钟开始每隔5分钟记录感觉阻滞情况直至达到最高平面,并在术后每隔30分钟记录。同时,采用Bromage评分法测定运动阻滞情况。结果以中位数表示。结果:两种药物在L2平面的镇痛起效时间均为6.0分钟,至L5平面分别为16.0和17.0分钟。罗哌卡因(Th 5)在24.5分钟后达到感觉镇痛的最大上界中位数,布比卡因(Th 7)在21.0分钟后达到。最大持续时间(恢复至L2)分别为321.5(罗哌卡因)和266.0分钟(布比卡因)(P<0.05)。2节段恢复时间分别为177.5和176.0分钟,4节段恢复时间分别为201.3和222.0分钟,二者相当。22例患者中有21例出现一度运动阻滞(潜伏期分别为15和12分钟);罗哌卡因组16例患者出现二度阻滞,布比卡因组14例出现(潜伏期分别为24和22分钟)。3例患者出现三度运动阻滞(潜伏期分别为45和38分钟)。两组一度运动阻滞持续时间分别为233分钟和207分钟,二度阻滞为150和155分钟,三度阻滞为135分钟。平均动脉压和心率无差异。30分钟时布比卡因组舒张压较罗哌卡因组低(-8.3%比-0.4%)。未观察到严重副作用。38.6%的患者给予了去氧肾上腺素和/或双氢麦角胺(1:10稀释液);34.1%的患者因治疗心动过缓(心率下降≥12%)和血压下降超过20%而给予阿托品。两组间镇痛(针刺)频率无显著差异。罗哌卡因组22例患者中有1例、布比卡因组22例患者中有6例需要追加镇痛药或全身麻醉。差异无统计学意义,但具有临床相关性。罗哌卡因组有2例患者、布比卡因组有4例患者肌肉松弛不足,影响手术操作。结论:1%罗哌卡因比0.75%布比卡因产生的镇痛持续时间更长,临床疗效更好。运动阻滞的临床差异无统计学意义。如对罗哌卡因运动阻滞的深入研究所显示,Bromage评分法不能代表一种具有良好镇痛效果和中等运动阻滞特性的药物。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验