BJA Advance Access published online on December 17, 2004
British Journal of Anaesthesia, doi:10.1093/bja/aei059
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Department, Ospedali Riuniti di Bergamo, Largo Barozzi 1 (24100) Bergamo, Italy
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Background. The rationale for replacing racemic bupivacaine with the s-enantiomers levobupivacaine and ropivacaine is to provide a wider margin of safety with the same analgesic efficacy and less postoperative motor block. In a randomized, double-blind, phase III, controlled trial we compared the caudal administration of levobupivacaine 0.25% and ropivacaine 0.25% with bupivacaine 0.25% in children. Methods. Ninety-nine ASA I-II children less than 10 yr old scheduled for elective sub-umbilical surgery were randomized to receive caudal block with bupivacaine 0.25%, ropivacaine 0.25% or levobupivacaine 0.25%. The primary outcome of the study was the clinical efficacy of the caudal block during the operation. Secondary outcome measures were analgesic onset time, pain relief after the operation and residual motor blockade. Results. The proportion of children with effective analgesia during the operation was similar among groups. There were no significant differences in the analgesic onset time of the caudal block. Bupivacaine produced a significant incidence of residual motor block compared with levobupivacaine or ropivacaine at wake-up (P<0.01). There were no significant differences in the number of patients receiving rescue analgesia after surgery. However, analgesic block lasted significantly longer in patients receiving bupivacaine (P=0.03). Conclusion. During sub-umbilical surgery, caudal levobupivacaine, ropivacaine and bupivacaine provided comparable analgesic efficacy. Bupivacaine produced a higher incidence of residual motor blockade and a longer analgesic block than ropivacaine and levobupivacaine.
Accepted October 21, 2004
Clinical Investigation
Randomized, double-blind, phase III, controlled trial comparing levobupivacaine 0.25%, ropivacaine 0.25% and bupivacaine 0.25% by the caudal route in children
2 Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Department, Ospedali Riuniti di Bergamo, School of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Milan Bicocca University, Italy
3 Department of Pharmacy, Ospedali Riuniti di Bergamo, Italy
P. Ingelmo, E-mail: pabloingelmo{at}libero.it
Abstract 
Declaration of interest, This study was funded by a restricted grant from Abbott Laboratories, Italy.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. Ingelmo, G. Frawley, M. Astuto, C. Duffy, S. Donath, N. Disma, G. Rosano, R. Fumagalli, and A. Gullo Relative Analgesic Potencies of Levobupivacaine and Ropivacaine for Caudal Anesthesia in Children Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2009; 108(3): 805 - 813. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. G. Locatelli, G. Frawley, A. Spotti, P. Ingelmo, S. Kaplanian, B. Rossi, L. Monia, and V. Sonzogni Analgesic effectiveness of caudal levobupivacaine and ketamine Br. J. Anaesth., May 1, 2008; 100(5): 701 - 706. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|