0.375%左旋布比卡因用于颈臂丛神经联合阻滞的临床观察

目的:观察锁骨骨折手术时应用0.375%左旋布比卡因30mL联合阻滞颈浅丛和肌间沟臂丛神经的临床效果。方法:ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级60例拟行锁骨骨折手术患者,分为左旋布比卡因组(LB组,n=30)和布比卡因组(B组,n=30),两组用药分别为0.375%左旋布比卡因或0.375%布比卡因30mL,各组用10mL作颈浅丛阻滞、20mL作肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞。记录注药后感觉阻滞达到Ⅱ级时间、注药后30min两组感觉阻滞达到Ⅲ级的例数、术后感觉神经阻滞持续时间、麻醉质量评级和术中不良反应。结果:感觉神经阻滞达到Ⅱ级时间LB组短于B组(P<0.05);注药30min后感觉阻滞达到Ⅲ级例数组间比较差异无显著性(P>0.05);LB组和B组感觉神经阻滞持续时间为(15.6±3.7)、(12.4±3.4)h,两组比较无统计学差异(P>0.05);麻醉质量评级,LB组完善24例、良好5例、不全1例,B组完善22例、良好6例、不全2例,两组比较无统计学差异(P>0.05);B组有1例出现剧烈恶心、呕吐,1例出现短暂耳鸣,LB组未出现不良反应。结论:应用0.375%左旋布比卡因作颈臂丛联合阻滞时起效时间短,镇痛效果确实,可满足锁骨骨折手术要求,且术后镇痛时间长于布比卡因,对术后镇痛有益。     

可乐定混合局麻药用于臂丛神经阻滞对尺神经的影响

目的:探讨小剂量可乐定混合左旋布比卡因用于肌间沟法臂丛神经阻滞对尺神经阻滞的影响。方法:选择60例ASA~级拟于上臂或手实行手术的患者,随机分成两组,可乐定组(组)和布比卡因组(组)每组30例。组在肌间沟穿刺出现异感后注入0.25%左旋布比卡因和150μg可乐定混合液25 ml,组注入0.25%左旋布比卡因混合1∶20万肾上腺素液25 ml,观察尺神经阻滞是否完善,及感觉阻滞完善时间、运动阻滞完善时间、术后感觉恢复时间、运动恢复时间、镇痛维持时间。结果:组和组相比:阻滞完善病例增多,差异有显著性(P<0.05),感觉运动阻滞完善时间无显著缩短(P>0.05),术后感觉运动恢复时间及镇痛维持时间显著延长(P<0.05)。结论:可乐定混合左旋布比卡因用于肌间沟法臂丛麻醉对尺神经阻滞的效果显著优于左旋布比卡因。     

罗哌卡因、左旋布比卡因和布比卡因在腋路臂丛神经阻滞麻醉的比较

目的：比较同浓度罗哌卡因、左旋布比卡因和布比卡因臂丛神经阻滞麻醉的临床效果。方法：90例行上肢手术患者,随机分成三组,每组30例。Ⅰ组、罗哌卡因,Ⅱ组、左旋布比卡因。Ⅲ组、布比卡因,行腋路臂丛神经阻滞麻醉。结果：感觉阻滞起效时间、阻滞持续时间、运动阻滞起效时间三组无显著性差异,感觉阻滞消退时间Ⅰ组显著长于Ⅱ、Ⅲ组,运动阻滞持续时间,消退时间Ⅰ组显著短于Ⅱ、Ⅲ组。结论：三种药物用于腋路臂丛神经麻醉均可产生良好的感觉、运动阻滞。     

利多卡因与左旋布比卡因或布比卡因混合液用于颈丛阻滞的比较

目的:比较0.375%左旋布比卡因或0.375%布比卡因与利多卡因1∶混合液用于颈丛阻滞的麻醉效1果和并发症。方法:ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级病人60例分两组行颈丛阻滞,LB组使用左旋布比卡因利多卡因混合液,B组使用布比卡因利多卡因混合液。观察两组的感觉阻滞起效时间、麻醉平面固定时间、麻醉质量评级、对循环的影响以及并发症发生的情况。结果:两组麻醉效果、对循环的影响以及并发症发生均相似(P>0.05)。结论:利多卡因左旋布比卡因混合液用于颈丛阻滞能提供和同浓度利多卡因布比卡因混合液相似的麻醉效果,在安全性方面利多卡因左旋布比卡因混合液具有一定的优势。     

0.375%左旋布比卡因与罗哌卡因用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的研究

目的:观察左旋布比卡因用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的效果,同时比较左旋布比卡因与罗哌卡因在肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞中的麻醉效果。方法:选择行上肢手术的病人40例,随机分为两组,每组20例,分别用0.375%左旋布比卡因和罗哌卡因25mL行臂丛神经阻滞,记录各支神经感觉和运动阻滞开始时间,术后进行随访,并记录感觉阻滞恢复时间。结果:两组对腋神经、前臂外侧皮神经、桡神经和正中神经阻滞开始时间无明显差异(P>0.05),肋间臂和臂内侧皮神经、前臂内侧皮神经和尺神经阻滞开始时间左旋布比卡因组快于罗哌卡因组(P<0.05)。两组比较前臂和肘运动阻滞的开始时间差异无显著性(P>0.05),腕和手指运动阻滞的开始时间左旋布比卡因组快于罗哌卡因组(P<0.05),同时其感觉恢复时间也长于罗哌卡因组(P<0.01),两组术中阻滞满意度相同。结论:0.375%左旋布比卡因可用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞,桡侧感觉神经阻滞起效和罗哌卡因相同,但尺侧起效和运动神经阻滞起效快于罗哌卡因,同时感觉恢复时间也长于罗哌卡因,从而可提供满意的术后止痛。     

左旋布比卡因腰麻用于剖宫产手术的临床观察

目的:比较左旋布比卡因与布比卡因和罗哌卡因腰麻用于剖宫产手术的麻醉效应。方法:选择ASAI～Ⅱ级,拟在腰麻下行剖宫产手术病人90例,随机分为3组,即布比卡因组(B组,n=30)、罗哌卡因组(R组,n=30)和左旋布比卡因组(LB组,n=30)。所有病人腰麻均接受0.5%重比重相应局麻药2.4mL(12mg)。记录各组感觉和运动神经阻滞的起效时间和维持时间、药物不良反应。肌松程度由手术医生评定,镇痛情况由病人自我评定。结果:3组病人的感觉阻滞起效时间、维持时间、最高阻滞平面差异无显著性(P>0.05);LB组的运动阻滞起效时间比R组快、比B组慢,而运动阻滞维持时间比R组长、比B组短(P<0.05);最大Bromage评分B组>LB组>R组(P<0.05);主要的药物不良反应为低血压、恶心、呕吐等。结论:左旋布比卡因腰麻用于剖宫产手术是安全的,并能达到较为完善的麻醉效果。     

左旋布比卡因与布比卡因蛛网膜下腔阻滞用于下肢手术效果比较

目的:评价新型局麻药盐酸左旋布比卡因蛛网膜下腔阻滞用于下肢手术的麻醉效果,并与同剂量盐酸布比卡因进行比较。方法:选择ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级下肢手术病人80例,随机等分为两组,每组40例,采用腰硬联合麻醉,在L2～3间隙穿刺成功后,布比卡因(B)组于蛛网膜下隙注入0.5%的布比卡因2mL加生理盐水1mL,左旋布比卡因(LB)组于蛛网膜下隙注入0.5%的左旋布比卡因2mL加生理盐水1mL,注药速度为0.2mL/s。结果:(1)两组患者感觉与运动阻滞起效和恢复时间、感觉最高平面比较差异无显著性。(2)两组病例阻滞完善,麻醉质量均为I级。(2)两组患者手术中均无低血压、心率减慢、呼吸抑制、ECG异常改变。术后随访膀胱恢复排尿功能时间,LB组与B组比较差异无显著性。术中术后均无明显头痛、头晕、恶心、呕吐、寒战等不良反应。结论:左旋布比卡因蛛网膜下腔阻滞用于下肢手术安全且完善,有临床应用和研究价值。     

甲磺酸罗哌卡因在腋路远端臂丛神经阻滞显微手外科中的应用效果观察

目的观察0.5%甲磺酸罗哌卡因和0.375%左旋布比卡因行腋路远端臂丛神经阻滞的效果。方法 50例手外科肘部以下手术患者,分为观察组和对照组各25例,观察组给予0.5%甲磺酸罗哌卡因,对照组给予0.375%左旋布比卡因,两组均采用相同麻醉方法。比较两组患者麻醉效果评级、感觉和运动阻滞完善时间及消退时间、不良反应情况。结果两组患者麻醉效果评级比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);感觉阻滞完善时间及消退时间观察组明显长于对照组,差异有显著统计学意义(P<0.01);运动阻滞完善时间及消退时间观察组明显短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组均未发生蛛网膜下腔或硬膜外阻滞、喉返神经或膈神经阻滞、霍纳综合征、气胸、局麻药中毒等并发症。结论 0.5%甲磺酸罗哌卡因的麻醉效果优于0.375%左旋布比卡因,更适合较长时间手术的显微手外科手术患者。     

左布比卡因与利多卡因合剂用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞临床观察

目的：评价0.375%左布比卡因与1%利多卡因合剂用于成人肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的麻醉效果,以及对中枢神经系统和心血管系统的影响。方法：选择上肢手术患者40例,并随机分为0.375%左布比卡因与1%利多卡因合剂组（A组,n=20）和0.375%布比卡因与1%利多卡因合剂组（B组,n=20）,行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞麻醉,均注入局麻药25 ml（含1∶400 000肾上腺素）,观察臂丛神经C5~T1感觉阻滞起效时间、肩关节、肘关节运动阻滞起效时间和臂丛神经阻滞维持时间及镇痛维持时间。结果：两组在C5-T1神经感觉阻滞起效时间和运动阻滞起效时间差异无显著性（P〉0.05）;在臂丛神经阻滞维持时间及镇痛维持时间组间差异也无显著性（P〉0.05）;A组有2例、B组有4例出现心动过缓症状,两组均无毒性反应发生。结论：0.375%左布比卡因与1%利多卡因合剂用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞具有起效快,效果优良,安全可靠的优点。     

罗哌卡因与左旋布比卡因改良肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞效果比较

目的 比较相同浓度的罗哌卡因和左旋布比卡因在臂丛神经阻滞麻醉中的临床效果.方法 选50例ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级行上肢手术的患者,随机分为罗哌卡因组和左旋布比卡因组,每组25例.分别用罗哌卡因和左旋布比卡因行改良肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞,观察并记录感觉阻滞起效时间、感觉阻滞完全时间、运动阻滞起效时间、阻滞恢复时间、麻醉效果和药物安全性指标,观察用药后的并发症和不良反应.结果 两组感觉阻滞起效时间、阻滞完全时间、运动阻滞起效时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),左旋布比卡因组阻滞恢复时间长于罗哌卡因组(P<0.05).两组麻醉效果、并发症和不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 罗哌卡因与左旋布比卡因肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞均可产生良好的感觉和运动阻滞,两种药物药效学相似.     

左旋布比卡因与布比卡因在腰硬联合麻醉中的应用比较

[目的]比较左旋布比卡因与布比卡因用于腰硬联合麻醉下行妇科手术的临床效果.[方法]拟在腰硬联合麻醉下行妇科手术患者60例,ASA Ⅰ～Ⅱ级,年龄20～60岁,随机分成两组（n=30）.L组蛛网膜下腔注射0. 5%左旋布比卡因15 mg＋10%葡萄糖1 mL配成重比重液,B组蛛网膜下腔注射0.5%布比卡因15 mg＋10%葡萄糖1 mL配成重比重液,观察两组感觉阻滞起效时间、运动阻滞起效时间、最高感觉阻滞平面上界、感觉阻滞开始消退时间、运动阻滞程度及麻醉质量评分.[结果]两组患者的感觉阻滞起效时间、运动阻滞起效时间、最高感觉阻滞平面上界、感觉阻滞开始消退时间均无显著性差异（P〉0.05）.运动阻滞程度2～3分者,L组低于B组（P〈0.05）.L组感觉阻滞开始时间和运动阻滞程度短于B组（P〈0.05）,两组患者麻醉质量评分差异无显著性.B组在麻醉后30 min时收缩压（SBP）较L组有明显降低（P〈0.05）,而心率（HR）和舒张压（DBP）无明显改变.[结论]0.5%左旋布比卡因用于腰硬联合阻滞麻醉时具有满意的麻醉效果且手术后运动阻滞恢复更快,对患者血流动力学影响更小,是临床上布比卡因的良好替代品.     

The Efficacy of Levobupivacaine, Ropivacaine, and Bupivacaine for Combined Psoas Compartment–Sciatic Nerve Block in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background and Objectives:   The aim of our study was to compare postoperative analgesic efficacy, and the extent of sensory and motor blockade of levobupivacaine, ropivacaine, and bupivacaine administered in a combined psoas compartment–sciatic nerve block (PCSNB) for total hip arthroplasty.
Methods:   Forty-five patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty under general anesthesia combined with PCSNB, were randomly assigned to receive either 50 mL levobupivacaine 3 mg/mL, 50 mL ropivacaine 4.5 mg/mL or 50 mL bupivacaine 3 mg/mL with epinephrine. Postoperative, the pain intensity at rest, the degree of motor block (Modified Bromage Scale) and the extent of sensory block (pin prick test) were recorded at 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours following initial injection in a double blind fashion.
Results:   The postoperative pain intensity was low and did not differ between groups, except for a significantly lower pain intensity in group ropivacaine compared with group levobupivacaine at 4 hours. Five patients (11%), equally divided over three groups, needed parenteral rescue opiates postoperatively. The extent of sensory block was not different between the three groups. In each group the majority of patients showed no sensory block in dermatome L1. Group levobupivacaine initially showed the least motor impairment. Motor impairment was found to be significantly higher in bupivacaine group compared with both ropivacaine and levobupivacaine groups at 12 ( P  = 0.012) and 48 hours ( P  = 0.003).
Conclusions:   Levobupivacaine, bupivacaine and ropivacaine are equally effective for PCSNB in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Residual pain may be due to the lack of sensory block in dermatome L1, suggesting that modification of this technique should be considered for this type of surgery. ▪     

左旋布比卡因、布比卡因和罗哌卡因腰硬联合麻醉用于子宫全切术的临床比较

[目的]观察左旋布比卡因在腰硬联合麻醉下子宫全切术中的应用效果并与相同剂量的布比卡因和罗哌卡因比较.[方法]选择ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级行择期子宫全切术的病人60例,随机分为三组,每组20例.左旋布比卡因组（LB组）予0.75%左旋布比卡因2 mL＋10%葡萄糖1 mL,布比卡因组（B组）予0.75%布比卡因2 mL＋10%葡萄糖1 mL,罗哌卡因组（R组）予0.75%罗哌卡因2 mL＋10%葡萄糖1 mL行腰硬联合麻醉,观察各组感觉阻滞起效时间、维持时间、最高感觉阻滞平面、最高平面固定时间、运动神经阻滞程度和麻醉质量及术中术后病人不良反应.[结果]感觉阻滞起效时间、最高平面固定时间LB组和B组差异无统计学意义（ P 〉0.05）,两组明显短于R组（ P 〈0.05）; 最高感觉阻滞平面三组差异无统计学意义（ P 〉0.05）;腰麻维持时间LB组和B组差异无统计学意义（ P 〉0.05）,而明显长于R组（ P 〈0.05）;运动神经阻滞程度LB组和B组差异无统计学意义（ P 〉0.05）,而明显大于R组（ P 〈0.05）;麻醉质量LB组和B组差异无统计学意义（ P 〉0.05）,而明显优于R组（ P 〈0.05）;三组病人均无严重术中术后不良反应.[结论]左旋布比卡因用于腰硬联合麻醉下子宫全切术可提供良好的麻醉效果,其麻醉作用与相同剂量布比卡因相似,而较罗哌卡因强.     

布比卡因、左旋布比卡因和罗哌卡因的剖宫产硬膜外阻滞效果比较

目的:比较3种局麻药用于剖宫产硬膜外阻滞的麻醉效果与不良反应。方法:在硬膜外阻滞下行剖宫产手术的90例产妇被随机分为3组。硬膜外穿刺置管成功后,先给试验量含1:200 000肾上腺素的2%利多卡因3 ml,再分别给予浓度均为0.5%的布比卡因、左旋布比卡因和罗哌卡因中的一种,分次给药。记录各组的感觉和运动阻滞的起效、时效及不良反应。结果:3组均有较好的麻醉镇痛效果,但有一些肌松不满意的病例。罗哌卡因组的感觉阻滞起效、时效较其他两组长,但尚无统计学差异;其运动阻滞起效与时效和运动阻滞程度均不及其他两组,且有统计学差异(P<0.05)。3组均未发生严重不良反应。结论:硬膜外0.5%布比卡因、左旋布比卡因或罗哌卡因用于剖宫产均有较好的麻醉镇痛效果,有一些肌松不满意的病例;但罗哌卡因的运动阻滞起效与时效和运动阻滞程度均不及其他两药。     

Effects of Adding Dexmedetomidine to Levobupivacaine in Axillary Brachial Plexus Block

Background

Although several studies have described effects of dexmedetomidine on peripheral nerve blocks, to date there is limited knowledge available on the impact of dexmedetomidine adjunct to levobupivacaine in axillary brachial plexus block.

Objective

In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of adding dexmedetomidine to levobupivacaine for an axillary brachial plexus block.

Methods

A total of 64 patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I/II scheduled to undergo forearm and hand surgery, in which an axillary block was used, were enrolled. The patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: in group L patients (n = 32), an axillary block was performed with 39 mL levobupivacaine 5% plus 1 mL of isotonic sodium chloride. In group D patients (n = 32), an axillary block was performed with 39 mL levobupivacaine 5% and 1 mL dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg⁻¹ plus isotonic sodium chloride. Demographic data, mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), peripheral oxygen saturation (Spo₂), sensory and motor block onset times and block durations, time to first analgesic use, total analgesic need, intraoperative verbal analog scale, postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) data, and side effects were recorded for each patient.

Results

There were no significant differences in patient and surgery characteristics between the 2 groups. Sensory block onset time was shorter in group D (P < 0.05). Sensory and motor block duration and time to first analgesic use were significantly longer in group D (P < 0.05), and the total need for analgesics was lower in group D (P < 0.05). Intraoperative 5- and 10-minute verbal analog scale values and postoperative VAS value at 12 hours were significantly lower in group D (P < 0.05). Intraoperative MAP and HR values, except at 5 minutes and postoperatively at 10 and 30 minutes and 1 and 2 hours, were significantly lower in group D (P < 0.01). Bradycardia, hypotension, hypoxemia, nausea, vomiting, and any other side effects were not seen in any patients.

Conclusions

It was concluded in our study that adding dexmedetomidine to axillary brachial plexus block shortens sensory block onset time, increases the sensory and motor block duration and time to first analgesic use, and decreases total analgesic use with no side effects. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier ISRCTN67622282.Key Words: axillary brachial plexus block, dexmedetomidine, levobupivacaine     

蛛网膜下腔注射左旋布比卡因与布比卡因运动阻滞效应的比较

目的比较患者蛛网膜下腔注射左旋布比卡因与布比卡因的运动神经阻滞效应。方法择期腰硬联合麻醉下拟行泌尿外科腔镜手术患者60例,年龄18～64岁,ASA分级I或Ⅱ级,按随机数字表法分为0．5％左旋布比卡因组和0．5％布比卡因组（n=30）,按照序贯法进行试验,阻滞有效,则下一例患者采用低一级剂量,阻滞无效,则下一例患者采用高一级剂量,初始剂量均为4mg,剂量梯度1mg,阻滞有效的标准：蛛网膜下腔给药后5或10min任一下肢的运动神经阻滞评分〉0分。采用序贯法计算蛛网膜下腔注射左旋布比卡因或布比卡因运动神经阻滞的半数有效剂量（ED50）。结果患者蛛网膜下腔注射左旋布比卡因和布比卡因运动神经阻滞的ED50及其95％置信区间分别为6．68（6．27,7．13）mg和5．06（4．56,5．47）mg,效力比为0．76。结论患者蛛网膜下腔注射左旋布比卡因运动神经阻滞效力小于布比卡因。     

Caudal anesthesia and its determinant factors

In 130 surgical patients with diseases and injuries in the area of the perineum and lower extremities the clinical effects of three modern local anesthetics: 2% solution of lidocaine, 0.5% solution of bupivacaine, 0.75% solution of ropivacaine and their combinations (2% lidocaine and 0.25% bupivacaine solution 2% lidocaine and ropivacaine 0.375% solution) were followed with regard to the influence of increasing volumes of local anesthetics and different rates of drug administration. It is established that an effective caudal anesthesia is provided with all modern local anesthetics, with increasing use of local anesthetic solution to 40 ml provides duration and the prevalence of sensory and motor blocks, the use of mixture of local anesthetics optimizes the development and maintenance of the caudal blockade.     

The effects of Different Concentrations and Equivalent Volumes of Levobupivacaine in Epidural Anesthesia

Background

Levobupivacaine, the S(-) isomer of bupivacaine, is less cardiotoxic than racemic bupivacaine. Previous studies have examined different concentrations of levobupivacaine in similar ways.

Objectives

This prospective, randomized, double-blind study was designed to determine the clinical efficacy and hemodynamic effects of different concentrations and equivalent volumes of levobupivacaine in epidural anesthesia. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the effects of concentration lower than 0.5% levobupivacaine.

Methods

Forty adult patients with an American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) I–III physical status undergoing transurethral endoscopic surgery were randomly divided into 2 groups to receive either 10 mL of isobaric levobupivacaine (0.5% + 5 mL 0.9% saline [group 1; n = 20]) or 10 mL of isobaric levobupivacaine (0.75% + 5 mL saline 0.9% saline [group 2; n = 20]) for epidural anesthesia. An observer blinded to group division evaluated the time of onset, maximum level, and time to 2-segment regression of sensory block.

Results

There were no differences between the 2 groups in terms of hemodynamic parameters and time of onset of the sensory block. There were significant differences, however, between the 2 groups in the maximum level of the sensory block (group 1, T9; group 2, T8; P = 0.010) and the time to 2-segment regression of sensory block (group 1, 46.35 minutes; group 2, 62.94 minutes; P = 0.013).

Conclusion

This study indicated that 10 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine plus 5 mL of 0.9% saline is a suitable solution for use in epidural anesthesia because it produces a block clinically comparable to that of 10 mL of 0.75% levobupivacaine plus 5 mL of 0.9% saline for transurethral resection of prostate surgery.     

Analgesia and effectiveness of levobupivacaine compared with ropivacaine in patients undergoing an axillary brachial plexus block

A common anesthetic technique for the upper extremity is local brachial plexus anesthesia using levobupivacaine and ropivacaine. To our knowledge, no study has been performed measuring differences in analgesic efficacy and latency when these local anesthetics are used for brachial plexus anesthesia. We enrolled 54 adults, assessed as ASA class I or II, into this double-blind, prospective investigation to receive 40 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine or levobupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine. Pain was assessed using a 0 to 10 verbal numeric rating scale (VNRS). Motor blockade was determined using a modified Bromage scale. Variables included analgesic duration, latency, and overall patient satisfaction. The ropivacaine group had significantly higher VNRS scores at the 8th (P= .001) and 10th (P = .003) postoperative hours. The duration of sensory analgesia was significantly longer in the levobupivacaine group (831 minutes) than in the ropivacaine group (642 minutes, P = .013). Return of motor activity was significantly faster in the ropivacaine group (778 minutes) than in the levobupivacaine group (1,047 minutes; P = .001). No other significant differences were noted between the groups. When considering levobupivacaine and ropivacaine for brachial plexus anesthesia, levobupivacaine should be considered when postoperative analgesia is a concern but not when an early return of motor activity is required.     

0．75％罗哌卡因用于小儿蛛网膜下腔阻滞中的临床研究

目的探讨0．75％罗哌卡因用于小儿蛛网膜下腔阻滞的合适剂量。方法选择ASAⅠ-Ⅱ级择期手术的小儿患者60例．随机分为三组，每组20例。A组0．75％罗哌卡因2ml（按每厘米椎管长0．15mg给药）、B组0．75％罗哌卡因2ml（按每厘米椎管长0．3mg给药）、C组0．5％布比卡因2ml（按每厘米椎管长0．15mg给药）。用药后观察最高感觉阻滞平面等蛛网膜下腔阻滞运动和感觉参数、监测不同时间段的MAP、HR值和不良反应和并发症。结果A组最高阻滞平面、T10感觉平面阻滞持续时间、平面固定时间、运动起效时间、运动恢复时间，与C组比较，差异有统计学意义（F分别=0．16、7．03、0．57、19．23、1．17，P均〈0．05），与B组比较，差异有统计学意义（F分别=0．21、6．78、0．78、17．98、1．23，P均〈0．05）；A组下肢运动阻滞程度弱于C组，差异有统计学意义（x^2分别=40．83、21．16、10．42，P均〈0．05），与B组比较，差异有统计学意义（x^2分别=36．01、21．16、9．60，P均〈0．05）：B组运动恢复快于C组，差异有统计学意义（F=1．23，P〈0．05）；B组感觉阻滞起效时间与A组、C组比较，差异无统计学意义（F分别=4．13、4．54，P均〉0．05）。结论0．75％罗哌卡因每厘米椎长0．3mg用于小儿脊麻能达到安全麻醉：而0．75％罗哌卡因每厘米椎长0．15mg用于小儿脊麻，运动、感觉阻滞较布比卡因差。