JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Khalil, S.
Right arrow Articles by Chuang, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Khalil, S.
Right arrow Articles by Chuang, A.

Anesth Analg 2006;102:395-399
© 2006 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000194590.82645.4c

PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA

Caudal Regional Anesthesia, Ropivacaine Concentration, Postoperative Analgesia, and Infants

Samia Khalil, MD, Hemanth Lingadevaru, MD, Mariana Bolos, MD, Mary Rabb, MD, Maria Matuszczak, MD, Douglas Maposa, MD, and Alice Chuang, PhD

Department of Anesthesiology, Department of Ophthalmology, The University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Houston, Texas

Address correspondence to Samia Khalil, MD, The University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Department of Anesthesiology, 6431 Fannin, MSB 5.020, Houston, TX 77030-1503. Address e-mail to samia.n.khalil{at}uth.tmc.edu.

In this randomized, double-blind trial we evaluated the quality and duration of analgesia and motor effects after caudal block using 1 mL/kg of ropivacaine 0.1% (Group 1), 0.15% (Group 2), 0.175% (Group 3) compared to 0.2% (Group 4) in infants 1–12 mo old. Postoperatively, the number of infants who received pain medication differed among the groups (P < 0.0005). There were more infants in Groups 1 and 2 compared with Group 4 and there was no difference between Groups 3 and 4. In the postanesthesia care unit, infants in Groups 1 and 2 received more pain medication than did those in Group 4 (P = 0.0098). In the day surgery unit, there was a significant difference among the groups (P = 0.0326); infants in Groups 3 and 4 required no pain medication. The analgesia duration differed among the groups (P = 0.034). Infants in Groups 1 and 2 had a shorter duration, and there was no difference between Groups 3 and 4. Infants in Group 4 took longer to regain their motor power compared with those in Group 3 (P = 0.0347). We conclude that in infants, ropivacaine 0.175% provided postoperative analgesia and duration similar to that of ropivacaine 0.2%, whereas ropivacaine 0.1% and 0.15% did not, and it was associated with fewer motor effects.






Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.