Introduction:Intrathecal clonidine or dexmedetomidine has improved the quality of spinal anesthesia, this clinical study was undertaken to assess the behavior of intrathecal clonidine as an adjuvant to bupivacaine in augmenting sensory block in patients undergoing lower limb surgeries.Materials and Methods:We studied 150 patients, between 18 and 60 years of age, patients were randomly divided into three groups of 50 each Group B: 0.5% bupivacaine 15 mg + 0.5 ml normal saline Group C: 0.5% bupivacaine 15 mg + 50 μg clonidine Group D: 0.5% bupivacaine 15 mg + 5 μg dexmedetomidine. Onset and duration of sensory block and motor block, the highest level of sensory blockade, duration of analgesia, and side-effects were assessed.Results:The onset of motor block was faster in Group C and Group D as compared to Group B, The time to reach Bromage scale 3 was fastest in Group C followed by Group D P < 0.001. The duration of sensory, motor blockade and duration of analgesia was longer in Groups C and D as compared to Group B, longest in Group D followed by C and B. The time to regression time to S1 dermatome was. It was longest in Group D followed by Group C and then Group B. Intergroup comparison B to C, B to D and C to D was significant. Duration of analgesia was significantly prolonged in Group C and Group D (P < 0.001) with a mean duration of 309.6 ± 50.99 min in Group C and 336.8 ± 55.38 min in Group D as compared to 204.8 ± 16.81 min in Group B. Intergroup comparison B to C, B to D and Group C to D was significant. Duration was longest in Group D followed by Group C and then Group B.Conclusion:Supplementation of bupivacaine spinal block with a low dose of intrathecal dexmedetomidine (5 μg) or clonidine (50 μg) produces a significantly shorter onset of motor and sensory block and a significantly longer sensory and motor block than bupivacaine alone.
Background:The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of postoperative analgesia with epidural buprenorphine and butorphanol tartrate.Methods:Sixty patients who were scheduled for elective laparoscopic hysterectomies were randomly enrolled in the study. At the end of the surgery, in study Group A 1 ml (0.3 mg) of buprenorphine and in Group B 1 ml (1 mg) of butorphanol tartrate both diluted to 10 ml with normal saline was injected through the epidural catheter. Visual analog pain scales (VAPSs) were assessed every hour till the 6th h, then 2nd hourly till the 12th h. To assess sedation, Ramsay sedation score was used. The total duration of postoperative analgesia was taken as the period from the time of giving epidural drug until the patients first complain of pain and the VAPS is more than 6. Patients were observed for any side effects such as respiratory depression, nausea, vomiting, hypotension, bradycardia, pruritus, and headache.Results:Buprenorphine had a longer duration of analgesia when compared to butorphanol tartrate (586.17 ± 73.64 vs. 342.53 ± 47.42 [P < 0.001]). Nausea, vomiting (13% vs. 10%), and headache (20% vs. 13%) were more in buprenorphine group; however, sedation score and pruritus (3% vs. 6%) were found to be more with butorphanol.Conclusion:Epidural buprenorphine significantly reduced pain and increased the quality of analgesia with a longer duration of action and was a better alternative to butorphanol for postoperative pain relief.
We report a case of blow-torch phenomenon encountered during diode laser assisted excision of a thyroglossal cyst in a child. This is first such case report from India and highlights an unusual complication which anesthesiologists need to be aware of due to the increasing use of operative laser.
Background:To date, racemic bupivacaine is the most popular local anesthetic for spinal anesthesia in parturients undergoing elective cesarean delivery. With the introduction of levobupivacaine as pure S (–) enantiomer of bupivacaine which offers advantages of lower cardiotoxicity and neurotoxicity and shorter motor block duration, its use has widely increased in India. However, very few studies have been conducted about its efficacy in obstetric anesthesia. Thus, this study was undertaken to compare the sensorial, motor block levels, and side-effects of equal doses of hyperbaric bupivacaine and levobupivacaine with intrathecal fentanyl addition in elective cesarean cases.Materials and Methods:After approval of College Ethical Committee, 30 parturient with American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II undergoing elective cesarean section were enrolled for study with their informed consent. They were randomly divided equally to either Group BF receiving 10 mg (2 ml) hyperbaric bupivacaine and 25 mcg (0.5 ml) fentanyl, or Group LF receiving 10 mg (2 ml) isobaric levobupivacaine and 25 mcg (0.5 ml) fentanyl. Sensory and motor block characteristics of the groups were assessed with pinprick, cold swab, and Bromage scale; observed hemodynamic changes and side-effects were recorded. Effects on the neonate were observed by APGAR score at 1 and 5 min and umbilical cord blood gas analysis.Results:Hemodynamic parameters like mean arterial pressure of Group BF were found to be lower. Group BF exhibited maximum motor block level whereas in Group LF, max sensorial block level and postoperative visual analog scale scores were higher. Umbilical blood gas pCO2 was slightly higher, and pO2 was marginally lower in Group BF. Onset of motor block time, time to max motor block, time to T10 sensorial block, reversal of two dermatome, the first analgesic need were similar in both groups.Conclusion:Intrathecal isobaric levobupivacaine-fentanyl combination is a good alternative to hyperbaric bupivacaine-fentanyl combination in cesarean surgery as it is less effective in motor block, it maintains hemodynamic stability at higher sensorial block levels.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.