A comparative study of hyperbaric bupivacaine (0.5%) with hyperbaric levobupivacaine for spinal anesthesia in cesarean section: A randomized, controlled trial

Yumnam, ArunkumarSingh; Debbarma, Biswarjit; Laithangbam, Pks; Singh, THemjit; Singh, T. Brojen; Singh, N Ratan

doi:10.4103/0972-4958.198439

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For cesarean section patients, spinal anesthesia is a reliable and safer procedure than general anesthesia (8). Spinal anesthesia is often used in emergency and elective cesarean section due to the reduction of anesthesia-related mortality, rapid onset, and complete muscle relaxation (9)(10)(11)(12). Less neonatal complications, lower prevalence of failed block, and reduction of pneumonia due to aspiration are among the advantages of spinal anesthesia (10).…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Study on the Effect of Intrathecal Bupivacaine vs. Ropivacaine on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes After Cesarean Section: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: The type of anesthesia in cesarean section can affect the mother and baby. This study aimed to determine the comparative effect of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine vs. hyperbaric ropivacaine on maternal and neonatal outcomes after cesarean section. Evidence Acquisition: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Google Scholar, IranDoc, MagIran, and Scopus databases were searched from 1 September 2022 to 1 November 2022. Eighteen clinical trials with 1542 patients were included in the analysis. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in hypotension, bradycardia, and Apgar score between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). The risk of nausea (relative risk (RR), 1.526; 95% CI, 1.175 - 1.981; P = 0.001) and vomiting (RR, 1.542; 95% CI, 1.048 - 2.268; P = 0.02) caused by bupivacaine was 0.53% and 0.54% higher than that of ropivacaine. The incidence of shivering (RR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.480 - 3.39; P = 0.00) was 2.24 times higher in the bupivacaine group than in the ropivacaine group. The average onset time of sensory block (standardized mean difference (SMD), -0.550; 95% CI, -1.054 to -0.045; P = 0.032) and motor block (SMD, -0.812; 95% CI, -1.254 to -0.371; P = 0.000) was significantly lower in the bupivacaine group than in the ropivacaine group. Conclusions: Despite the fact that ropivacaine and bupivacaine are effective in cesarean section, ropivacaine is more favorable because of less hemodynamic changes, less duration of sensory and motor block, and fewer side effects, which are effective in patient recovery.

show abstract