A Comparative Evaluation Of Hemodynamic Effects Of Regional Ropivacaine 0.75 % (H) Versus Bupivacaine 0.5 % (H) In Patients Undergoing Infra-Umbilical Surgeries

Authors

  • Garima Anant , Abhilasha , Geeta Choudhary , Shubhada Bhagat , Hemlata Sharma

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47750/pnr.2022.13.S10.450

Abstract

Aims and objectives: The aim of this randomized, double-blinded study was to compare the clinical profile of 2.5 ml (12.5 mg) hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5%, and 2.5 ml (18.75 mg) hyperbaric ropivacaine 0.75 % in patients undergoing infra-umbilical surgeries.

Material and method: Patients between 18-60 years belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-III scheduled to undergo spinal anesthesia during infra-umbilical surgeries were included in the study. Group B: Patients received 12.5 mg of Bupivacaine (h) 0.5 % and Group R: Patients received 18.75 mg of Ropivacaine (h) 0.75 %.

Results: There was a significant mean difference in systolic and diastolic blood pressure between groups R and B at 5 min, 10 min, 15 min, 20 min, 25 min, 30 min (p value of 0.001). There was a significant mean difference in level of sensory blockade between group R and B at 5 min, 45 min, 50 min, 55 min, 60 min, 180 min (p value of less than 0.05). There was a significant mean difference in level of motor block between group R and B only at 180 min (p value of 0.001). There was a significant mean difference in VAS only at 180 min (p value of 0.001).

Conclusion: Use of ropivacaine for intrathecal anesthesia in infra-umbilical surgeries provided an adequate level of block for the surgery with lesser duration of motor blockade with good analgesia and stable hemodynamics.

Downloads

Published

2022-12-31 — Updated on 2022-12-31

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

A Comparative Evaluation Of Hemodynamic Effects Of Regional Ropivacaine 0.75 % (H) Versus Bupivacaine 0.5 % (H) In Patients Undergoing Infra-Umbilical Surgeries. (2022). Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results, 3717-3724. https://doi.org/10.47750/pnr.2022.13.S10.450