To compare the efficacy and side-effects of 0.5% ropivacaine with that of 0.5% bupivacaine when used for single-shot epidural anaesthesia for orthopaedic surgery. Randomized controlled trial.
Department of Anesthesiology, Combined Military Hospital Rawalpindi, over a period of eight months from June 2013 to January 2014. The study was carried out in 60 ASA physical status I, II or III patients undergoing elective lower extremity orthopedic surgery. Two groups of 30 patients each received single-shot epidural anaesthesia either with ropivacaine 0.5% [ropivacaine group] or bupivacaine 0.5% [bupivacaine group] . Onset, time for maximum height and median height of sensory block was assessed as well as time to two segment recession. Modified Bromage scale was used for motor blockade. Total duration of motor block and common side effects were also recorded. The patients in both groups were similar in age, height, weight, gender and ASA status. There was no significant difference in onset of sensory block and time for maximum height of sensory block. The median heighest level of sensory block was T6 [T5-T8] for ropivacaine group and T5 [T4-T7] for bupivacaine group. Time for two segment regression and duration of sensory block were also comparable for both groups. The total duration of motor block was significantly more in bupivacaine group [159 min vs 134.2 min, p< 0.001] . Modified Bromage scale was also significantly higher in bupivacaine group [2.86 vs 1.96 min, p<0.001] . Side effects like hypotension, bradycardia, nausea, vomiting and shivering were similar in both groups. Epidural administration of 0.5% ropivacaine provided effective and good quality anaesthesia. Motor blockade was of less duration as compared to equivalent dose of 0.5% bupivacaine, which may offer potential benefit of early patient mobilization after orthopaedic surgery
Azmat Riaz ,Rao Ali Shan Khan ,Faisal Salim ,Mohammad Saeed ,Raheel Azhar Khan ,
Comparison of ropivacaine and bupivacaine as single-shot epidural anaesthesia for orthopaedic surgery,
Pak. Armed Forces Med. J. 2015;
644-648 Views : 0