scholarly journals Comparison of the Effect of Two Different Doses of 0.75% Glucose-Free Ropivacaine for Spinal Anesthesia for Lower Limb and Lower Abdominal Surgery

2004 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. 423-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
John On-Nin Wong ◽  
Thomas Dou-Moo Tan ◽  
Pak-On Leung ◽  
Kin-Fui Tseng ◽  
Ning-Wei Cheu ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 45-49
Author(s):  
KT Venkatesh Murthy ◽  
Maya D Nadkarni ◽  
N Amaranath

ABSTRACT Clonidine, a centrally acting α2 adrenergic agonist has been under use as an adjuvant with hyperbaric bupivacaine for prolonging analgesia and maintaining hemodynamic stability during lower limb orthopedic and lower abdominal surgeries. The purpose of our study was to compare the efficacy and safety of intrathecal Clonidine 50 and 75 μg as adjuvant to hyperbaric Bupivacaine 15 mg (3 mL), and hyperbaric Bupivacaine 3 mL with saline 0.5 mL for onset and duration of anesthesia, hemodynamic stability, and side effects if any. This prospective randomized controlled study was conducted on 120 patients scheduled for lower limb orthopedic surgeries under spinal anesthesia. The study population was divided into three groups with 40 patients in each group. Group I (controlled group) received 3 mL (15 mg) of 0.5% Bupivacaine heavy and 0.5 mL of normal saline. Group II received 50 μg of clonidine followed by Bupivacaine 0.5% 3 mL (15 mg) and group III received 75 μg of clonidine followed by Bupivacaine 0.5% 3 mL (15 mg) intrathecally. Time taken for onset of sensory and motor blockade, duration of anesthesia, and any perioperative and postoperative complications was noted. We found that clonidine 75 μg given prior to bupivacaine, 3 mL, significantly prolongs the duration of anesthesia with minimal changes in hemodynamic parameters and postoperative complications. How to cite this article Murthy KTV, Nadkarni MD, Amaranath N. Comparison of Efficacy of Different Doses of Clonidine with 0.5% Bupivacaine for Spinal Anesthesia in Lower Limb Orthopedic Surgeries. J Med Sci 2017;3(2):45-49.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-154
Author(s):  
A. B. Yakushevsky ◽  
A. N. Plekhanov ◽  
A. B. Ayusheev

Background. In recent years, various methods of combined anesthesia during abdominal surgery have been introduced into clinical practice.Aim. To demonstrate the possibilities of a combination of high prolonged spinal anesthesia and endotracheal anesthesia during abdominal surgery.Materials and methods. A clinical case of combined use of high prolonged spinal anesthesia and endotracheal anesthesia in a 48-year-old patient with a tumor in the right half of the ascending part of the right half of the colon is presented.Results. The patient received a puncture of the spinal space at a standard point and was installed a spinal catheter in the cranial direction for 3 cm. An isobaric solution of marcaine in the initial dose of 20 mg was injected into the catheter. The regulation of the development of the block was regulated by the inclination of the head end of the table by 60°. After that endotracheal anesthesia was performed on the basis of fentanyl and propofol. This combination allowed to expand the scope of surgical intervention, provided adequate pain relief intraoperatively and in the postoperative period, without the use of narcotic analgesics. With the appearance of signs of recovery of pain sensitivity, intraoperatively or in the postoperative period, re-introduction of the anesthetic into the spinal catheter was performed in half of the initial dose with liquor barbotage. In the early postoperative period, the patient was on strict bed rest with a head end of the bed raised at 30–45°. The method provides complete segmental blockade and muscle relaxation in the area of operation, stability of central hemodynamics during surgery and in the postoperative period.Conclusion. This type of anesthesia is more easily tolerated by patients, accompanied by early awakening and extubation, characterized by stability of central hemodynamics, reduced risk of complications, the possibility of prolonging anesthesia with lower doses of narcotic analgesics in the intraoperative period, providing high-quality anesthesia in the postoperative period without resorting to the use of narcotic analgesics.


Author(s):  
Wesla Packer Pfeifer Ferrarezi ◽  
Angélica de Fátima de Assunção Braga ◽  
Valdir Batista Ferreira ◽  
Sara Quinta Mendes ◽  
Maria José Nascimento Brandão ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 127 (6) ◽  
pp. 934-941 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warwick D. Ngan Kee

Abstract Background Norepinephrine has been investigated as a potential alterative to phenylephrine for maintaining blood pressure during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery with the advantage of less depression of maternal heart rate and cardiac output. However, the relative potencies of these two vasopressors have not been fully determined in this context. Methods In a random-allocation, graded dose–response study, 180 healthy patients undergoing spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery received a single bolus of norepinephrine in one of six different doses ranging from 4 to 12 µg or phenylephrine in one of six different doses ranging from 60 to 200 µg to treat the first episode of hypotension. The magnitude of response was measured as the percentage of full restoration of systolic blood pressure to the baseline value. Dose–response analysis was performed using nonlinear regression to derive four-parameter logistic dose–response curves, which were compared to determine relative potency. Results Data were analyzed for 180 patients. The estimated ED50 values (dose giving a 50% response) were norepinephrine 10 µg (95% CI, 6 to 17 µg) and phenylephrine 137 µg (95% CI, 79 to 236 µg). The estimated relative potency ratio for the two drugs was 13.1 µg (95% CI, 10.4 to 15.8 µg). Conclusions Comparative dose–response analysis was completed for norepinephrine and phenylephrine given as a bolus to treat the first episode of hypotension in patients undergoing spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. The estimated dose equivalent to phenylephrine 100 µg was norepinephrine 8 µg (95% CI, 6 to 10 µg). These results may be useful to inform the design of future comparative studies.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 31-35
Author(s):  
Arpit Sharma ◽  
Neena Jain ◽  
Kavita Jain ◽  
Veena Patodi ◽  
Deepika Meena ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document