Skip Navigation


BJA Advance Access originally published online on April 19, 2004
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
92/6/850    most recent
aeh155v1
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (12)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Camorcia, M.
Right arrow Articles by Columb, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Camorcia, M.
Right arrow Articles by Columb, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2004, Vol. 92, No. 6 850-853
© 2004 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Epidural test dose with levobupivacaine and ropivacaine: determination of ED50 motor block after spinal administration

M. Camorcia*,1, G. Capogna1, G. Lyons2 and M. Columb3

1 Department of Anaesthesia, Clinica Città di Roma, Roma, Italy. 2 Department of Anaesthesia, St James’ University Hospital, Leeds, UK. 3 Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, South Manchester University Hospital, Wythenshawe, UK

*Corresponding author: Department of Anaesthesia Città di Roma Hospital Via Maidalchini 20, 00152 Roma, Italy. E-mail: michela_camorcia{at}yahoo.it

Background. When a test is required to detect a possible intrathecal catheter, many would seek to use the same local anaesthetic as that used for epidural analgesia. The rapid onset of inappropriate motor block after a local anaesthetic administered epidurally implies intrathecal spread. Because of claims of greater sensory–motor separation, or because of reduced potency compared with bupivacaine, the efficacy of the new local anaesthetics in intrathecal testing has been questioned. The aim of this study was to establish the feasibility of a test dose for an inadvertent intrathecal catheter using ropivacaine and levobupivacaine, and to establish the dose required.

Methods. Sixty women undergoing elective Caesarean section with a combined spinal– epidural technique were enrolled into this prospective, double-blind sequential allocation study. The women were randomized to receive plain levobupivacaine 0.5% or ropivacaine 0.5% intrathecally. The dose was determined according to up–down sequential allocation. The end-point was any evidence of lower limb motor block within 5 min of injection.

Results. The ED50 motor block at 5 min was 4.8 mg (95% CI, 4.49, 5.28) for levobupivacaine and 5.9 mg (95% CI, 4.82, 6.98) for ropivacaine (95% CI difference, 0.052, 1.98) (P=0.04). The estimated ED95 motor block was 5.9 mg (95% CI 5.19, 6.71) for levobupivacaine and 8.3 mg (95% CI, 6.30, 10.44) for ropivacaine. The potency ratio between the two drugs was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.69, 0.99).

Conclusions. Both local anaesthetics produce evidence of motor block within 5 min of intrathecal injection and could serve as tests of intrathecal administration. Derived ED95 values suggest 10 mg doses should be effective, but this study did not measure predictive value. Ropivacaine is less potent for motor block than levobupivacaine by a factor of 0.83 (P<0.04).

Br J Anaesth 2004; 92: 850–3


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
M. Camorcia, G. Capogna, C. Berritta, and M. O. Columb
The Relative Potencies for Motor Block After Intrathecal Ropivacaine, Levobupivacaine, and Bupivacaine
Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2007; 104(4): 904 - 907.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br J AnaesthHome page
G. A. McLeod and M. O. Columb
Moles, weights and potencies: freedom of expression!
Br. J. Anaesth., July 1, 2005; 95(1): 110 - 111.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br J AnaesthHome page
P. H. Rosenberg and S. A. Schug
Levobupivacaine base and levobupivacaine hydrochloride
Br. J. Anaesth., April 1, 2005; 94(4): 544 - 544.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.