Article

Spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: plain vs hyperbaric bupivacaine.

Department of Anaesthesia, Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.
Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association (Impact Factor: 0.4). 08/2012; 62(8):807-11.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To compare the clinical characteristics of sensory and motor block as well as haemodynamic stability using plain and hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.
Two equal groups were formed from a total of 60 patients who were enrolled in this prospective randomised double-blinded study that was done at tertiary care hospital in Karach, during 2005 to 2006. Equal volume of plain and hyperbaric bupivacaine 10 mg with 25 mcg of fentanyl was used for spinal anaesthesia in the two groups that were formed on the basis of random allocation. Characteristics of sensory and motor block, episodes of hypotension and bradycardia as well as use of ephedrine and atropine were recorded by blinded investigator.
There was no difference in the onset of block, time to achieve maximum level of block and haemodynamic parameters between the two groups. However, plain bupivacaine took more time for two dermatomes sensory level regression below T4, and resulted in prolonged block duration. No statistically significant difference was found for episodes of hypotension, bradycardia and use of ephedrine and atropine.
In obstetric population, both plain and hyperbaric bupivacaine 10 mg, with fentanyl produced adequate anaesthesia for caesarean section without any differences in the time of onset, extent of the block and haemodynamic parameters. However, sensory level regression was delayed in the plain group which may have caused prolonged duration of block.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Gauhar Afshan, Jun 27, 2014
1 Follower
 · 
51 Views
 · 
18 Downloads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We randomized 76 parturients to a double-blinded trial to receive spinal anesthesia with either hyperbaric or plain bupivacaine 9 mg with fentanyl 20 microg for elective cesarean delivery. A combined spinal-epidural technique was used. The onset and duration of anesthesia (absence of pinprick sensation), analgesia (absence of sharp sensation to pinprick), and absence of cold sensation and motor block were measured until recovery from the motor block. No major differences were seen in onset or duration of anesthesia between the groups. Motor block, however, vanished faster when hyperbaric bupivacaine was used (P < 0.05). The level of anesthesia (no pinprick sensation) required for painless operation was at dermatome T5. At this time, the absence of cold sensation ranged from dermatome T1 to C3. The median time for the anesthesia to reach dermatome T5 was 10 min. Cervical spread of pinprick anesthesia was noted in six patients, and five needed supplementary analgesics during surgery (not significant between the groups). Maternal satisfaction was good. Nine milligrams of either plain or hyperbaric bupivacaine with fentanyl intrathecally provided similar onset, depth, and duration of sensory anesthesia for cesarean delivery with good maternal satisfaction. Motor block developed and diminished faster with the hyperbaric solution. IMPLICATIONS: Nine milligrams of either plain or hyperbaric bupivacaine with fentanyl intrathecally provided similar onset, depth, and duration of sensory anesthesia for cesarean delivery with good maternal satisfaction. Motor block developed and diminished faster with the hyperbaric solution.
    Anesthesia & Analgesia 11/1999; 89(5):1257-62. DOI:10.1213/00000539-199911000-00033 · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Amethocaine 1% solution was mixed with equal volumes of water, 0.9% saline or 10% dextrose to prepare respectively, hypobaric, isobaric and hyperbaric solutions which were compared for intradural spinal anaesthesia in 60 patients. Thirty patients received 10 mg and 30 patients received 15 mg of amethocaine. Injections were made with the patients in the lateral recumbent position and the operating table was horizontal during and after injection. Equal numbers of patients and equal numbers of males and females received hypobaric, isobaric and hyperbaric solutions. The mean spread of analgesia after the hyperbaric solution was five dermatomes greater than after the other two solutions, but the extent of analgesia was not significantly different whether amethocaine 10 mg or 15 mg was injected. The mean duration of analgesia after the hyperbaric solution was 285 min compared with 332 min and 360 min after the isobaric and hypobaric solutions respectively. The mean duration of analgesia after amethocaine 15 mg was significantly greater than after 10 mg.
    BJA British Journal of Anaesthesia 07/1980; 52(6):589-96. DOI:10.1093/bja/52.6.589 · 4.35 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The standard spinal preparation of bupivacaine contains a high concentration of glucose (80 mg ml(-1)). However, the addition of only a small amount of glucose (8 mg ml(-1)) to plain solutions of bupivacaine results in a solution which, although no more than marginally hyperbaric, produces a more predictable block when used for spinal anaesthesia in non-pregnant patients. However, bupivacaine 5 mg ml(-1) in glucose 8 mg ml(-1) has a density [1.00164 (SD 0.00008) at 37 degrees C] which is relatively greater than that of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of the pregnant patient at term (1.0003 at 37 degrees C) because CSF density decreases during pregnancy. Therefore, a double-blind, randomized, controlled study was carried out to compare intrathecal bupivacaine (glucose 8 mg ml(-1)) with bupivacaine (glucose 80 mg ml(-1)) in 40 pregnant patients at term. Although there was no difference between groups in onset of sensory block, dose of ephedrine or patient satisfaction, patients receiving bupivacaine (5 mg ml(-1)) with glucose (8 mg ml(-1)) had persistently higher sensory blocks between 60 and 120 min after intrathecal injection, suggesting that the spread of spinal solutions in the pregnant patient at term is not dependent on density.
    BJA British Journal of Anaesthesia 07/2001; 86(6):805-7. DOI:10.1093/bja/86.6.805 · 4.35 Impact Factor