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 (21)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chung, C.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Chin, Y.-J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chung, C.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Chin, Y.-J.
Anesth Analg 2001;93:157-161
© 2001 International Anesthesia Research Society

OBSTETRIC ANESTHESIA

Hyperbaric Spinal Ropivacaine for Cesarean Delivery: A Comparison to Hyperbaric Bupivacaine

Chan-Jong Chung, MD, So-Ron Choi, MD, Kwang-Hwan Yeo, MD, Han-Suk Park, MD, Soo-Il Lee, MD, and Young-Jhoon Chin, MD

Department of Anesthesiology, College of Medicine, Dong-A University, Pusan, Korea

Address correspondence and reprint request to Chan-Jong Chung, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, Dong-A University Hospital, Dongdaesin-dong, Seo-gu, Pusan 602-715, Korea. Address e-mail to cjchung{at}daunet.donga.ac.kr

We evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of spinal anesthesia with 0.5% hyperbaric ropivacaine compared with 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine for elective cesarean delivery. Sixty healthy, full-term parturients were randomly assigned to receive either 12 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine or 18 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric ropivacaine intrathecally. There were no significant differences in demographic or surgical variables or neonatal outcomes between groups. Onset time of sensory block to T10 or to peak level was later in the Ropivacaine group (P < 0.05). The median (range) peak level of analgesia was T3 (T1-5) in the Bupivacaine group and T3 (T1-4) in the Ropivacaine group. Time for sensory block to recede to T10 did not differ between groups. Duration of sensory block was shorter in the Ropivacaine group (188.5 ± 28.2 min vs 162.5 ± 20.2 min; P < 0.05). Complete motor block of the lower extremities was obtained in all patients. Ropivacaine also produced a shorter duration of motor blockade than bupivacaine (113.7 ± 18.6 min vs 158.7 ± 31.2 min; P < 0.000). The intraoperative quality of anesthesia was excellent and similar in both groups. Side effects did not differ between groups. Eighteen milligrams of 0.5% hyperbaric ropivacaine provided effective spinal anesthesia with shorter duration of sensory and motor block, compared with 12 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine when administered for cesarean delivery

Implications: Eighteen milligrams of 0.5% hyperbaric ropivacaine provided effective spinalanesthesia with shorter duration of sensory and motor block, compared with 12mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine when administered for cesareandelivery.






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 © 2001 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.