1%甲哌卡因与0.5%罗哌卡因用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞锁骨骨折术中的比较

目的观察1%甲哌卡因与0.5%罗哌卡因用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞锁骨骨折术中麻醉效果的比较。方法择期行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞锁骨骨折成年患者30例,ASAⅠ~Ⅱ级,随机分为2组(n=15);1%甲哌卡因组(M组)和0.5%罗哌卡因组(R组)。两组均在神经刺激仪引导下,以肌间沟入路行臂丛神经阻滞,M组和R组分别注入1%甲哌卡因25 mL和0.5%罗哌卡因25 mL。观察两组血流动力学,感觉、运动阻滞起效及恢复时间,术后VAS评分,不良反应及麻醉满意度。结果与R组比较,M组感觉、运动阻滞起效时间缩短,阻滞恢复时间缩短(P0.05),术后6 h、12 h的VAS评分增加(P0.05)。结论 1%甲哌卡因与0.5%罗哌卡因行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞,均能满足锁骨骨折手术。采用1%甲哌卡因较0.5%罗哌卡因起效更快,且感觉、运动恢复更早,利于早期活动,但术后镇痛效果不如0.5%罗哌卡因。     

蛛网膜下腔阻滞麻醉应用0.5%或0.75%罗哌卡因或0.5%布比卡因的效果比较

目的：观察不同浓度罗哌卡因用于蛛网膜下腔阻滞的效果。方法：45例择期膝关节镜手术病人，随机分为三组，每组15例，分别于蛛网膜下腔注入0.5%布比卡因2.5ml（C组），0.5%罗哌卡因2.5ml（R1组）或0.75%罗哌卡因2.5ml（R2组）。记绿麻醉后的血压、心率、脉博血氧饱和度，感觉与运动阻滞的起效时间，达最高阻滞平面和最大阻滞程度的时间。感觉与运动阻滞的恢复时间。术后第二天随访记录术后并发症。结果：三组病人感觉阻滞起效和达到最高阻滞平面无显著性差异。感觉阻滞维持时间以0.75%罗哌卡因组与0.5%布比卡因组明显长于0.5%罗哌卡因组，而前两组间无显著性差异，运动阻滞起效时间三组组无显著性差异。运动阻滞程度及维持时间以0.5%罗哌卡因组较0.75%罗哌卡因组或0.5%布比卡因组有显著性差异。而后两组间无显著性差异。结论：蛛网膜下腔阻滞应用0.75%罗哌卡因与0.5%d布比卡因的作用相似，均可以安全使用于蛛网膜下腔阻滞麻醉。0.75%罗哌卡因可提供更完善的运动和感觉阻滞。     

甲磺酸罗哌卡因和盐酸罗哌卡因肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的比较

目的 观察0.596%甲磺酸罗哌卡因和0.5%盐酸罗哌卡因在超声引导下行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的效果.方法 60例上肢手术行肌间沟臂丛麻醉的患者,随机均分成两组:A组给予0.596%甲磺酸罗哌卡因30 ml;B组给予0.5%盐酸罗哌卡因30 ml.比较两组感觉及运动阻滞起效时间、阻滞程度、运动恢复时间、镇痛持续时间和不良反应.结果 A组尺神经感觉阻滞起效时间显著快于B组[(38.30±14.65)min vs.(48.03±22.34)min](P<0.05).注药60 min A组尺神经感觉完全阻滞29例(96.7%),显著多于B组的20例(66.7%)(P<0.05).结论 0.596%甲磺酸罗哌卡因的尺神经感觉阻滞优于0.5%盐酸罗哌卡因.     

罗哌卡因与布比卡因硬膜外阻滞用于产科麻醉的效果及母体和胎儿血药浓度变化的比较

目的 比较罗哌卡因和布比卡因硬膜外阻滞用于产科麻醉的效果,及在母体中血药浓度的变化及经胎盘转运的情况。方法18例择期行宫产手术的足月单胎孕妇,随机分为两组,分别用0.75％罗哌卡因(R组)或0.5％布比卡因(B组)行硬外阻滞。观察感觉和运动阻滞情况、血压的变化、新生儿脐静脉血气和Apgar、NACS评分。并用高效液相色谱法测定了母体和胎儿的血浆药物浓度。结果 两组产归感觉和运动阻滞的起效时问和持续时间、最高阻滞平面、低血压的发生率、新生儿血气和Apgar、NACS评分都无显著差别。R组和B组母体血浆药物浓度在15～30min内达高峰,分别为(613±90)ng/ml和(512±63)ng/ml,脐静脉/母体静脉血药浓度比(UV/MV)分别为0.42=0.12和0.48±0.15。结论0.75％罗哌卡因和0.5％布比卡因硬膜外腔阻滞用于剖宫产手术时,都能获得满意的临床效果;两药经胎盘的转运比率相似;母体和胎儿血浆药物浓度远低于可致毒性反应的浓度,且罗哌卡因的安全范围大于布比卡因。     

左旋布比卡因与罗哌卡因应用于臂丛神经阻滞的临床对比研究

目的 比较左旋布比卡因和罗哌卡因用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的效果及不良反应。方法 本组自2007年5月～12月对60例行上肢手术患者，ASAI～Ⅱ级，分为罗哌卡因（R）组和左旋布比卡因（L）组，每组30例，采用肌间沟法行臂丛神经阻滞，观察感觉／运动神经阻滞的起效时间及持续时间、患者对神经阻滞满意度、不良反应。结果 两组间感觉神经和运动神经阻滞起效时间的差异无显著性（P〉0．05）；L组的感觉和运动神经阻滞持续时间显著长于R组（P〈0．05），神经阻滞优良率均为100％。结论 左旋布比卡因与罗哌卡因均可安全用于临床肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞，二者有相似的药效学特性，但左旋布比卡因在术后镇痛方面略优于罗哌卡因。     

罗哌卡因、左旋布比卡因与布比卡因低位硬膜外麻醉的比较

目的比较罗哌卡因、左旋布比卡因与布比卡因低位硬膜外麻醉的临床效果。方法60例行下腹部手术病人。随机分成三组，每组20例。Ⅰ组：0．5％罗哌卡因；Ⅱ组：0．5％左旋布比卡因；Ⅲ组：0．5％布比卡因。行连续低位硬膜外麻醉。观察感觉阻滞起效时间、感觉阻滞平面上界、运动阻滞起效时间、运动阻滞程度及麻醉质量。结果Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ组首次局麻药用量分别为（14．38±1．57）、（14．75±0．50）和（13．80±1．30）ml。Ⅰ组运动阻滞起效时间比Ⅲ组长（P〈0．05），Ⅰ组Bromage评分为1分的例数多于Ⅲ组（P〈0．05）。与Ⅲ组比较，Ⅰ、Ⅱ组感觉阻滞起效时间、感觉阻滞平面上界差异均无统计学意义。Ⅲ组SBP在感觉阻滞平面达上界及运动阻滞起效时有明显降低（P〈0．05）。结论0．5％罗哌旨因、左旋布比卡因或布比卡因连续硬膜外麻醉均可产生良好的感觉和运动阻滞，三种药物药效学相似。     

0.5%罗哌卡因与布比卡因10mg在蛛网膜下腔阻滞的比较

目的观察0.5%罗哌卡因、布比卡因10 mg蛛网膜下腔阻滞对感觉、运动神经的阻滞效果及对血流动力学影响。方法随机选取择期行下肢、下腹或肛肠手术病人48例,ASAⅠ~Ⅱ级,分为布比卡因组(BP组)和罗哌卡因组(RP组),于L2~3、L3~4间隙行腰硬联合穿刺,蛛网膜下腔穿刺成功后于蛛网膜下腔分别注入0.5%的布比卡因或罗哌卡因10 mg,之后于硬膜外腔向头侧置管4 cm以备蛛网膜下腔阻滞不能满足手术需要时追加局麻药。观查并记录感觉阻滞平面,运动神经阻滞程度及血流动力学变化。结果两组病人血流动力学稳定,麻醉平面均能满足手术要求。BP组感觉平面高于RP组,RP组术后下肢运动恢复快于BP组。结论0.5%罗哌卡因、布比卡因10 mg用于腰硬联合麻醉可作为肛肠、部分下腹、下肢手术的麻醉选择;其中罗哌卡因术后下肢运动恢复快,较快恢复自主排尿为其优点。     

罗哌卡因用于断指再植手术肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的效应

目的 探讨罗哌卡因用于断指再植手术肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的效应.方法 对2008年3月至9月,分别用0.50%的罗哌卡因和0.375%的布比卡因25 ml行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞进行的断指再植手术72例进行分析.结果 罗哌卡因对感觉神经阻滞的起效时间明显缩短,维持时间明显延长,对运动神经阻滞的起效时间和维持时间均明显缩短,毒副作用与并发症明显减少.结论 罗哌卡因用于断指再植手术肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞麻醉比布比卡因起效迅速、镇痛持续时间长,麻醉效果满意.     

甲磺酸罗哌卡因用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的临床观察

目的观察比较不同浓度的甲磺酸罗哌卡因用于肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞施行上肢手术的麻醉效果和安全性。方法40例ASAⅠ~Ⅱ级,18~55岁拟行上肢手术病人,随机分为四组,分别用0.45%、0.3%、0.25%甲磺酸罗哌卡因和0.25%布比卡因各30 ml行肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞。注药后1、2、3、4、5、6、7、8、9、10、20、30、60 min分别对病人的感觉和运动进行评价并观察病人是否有不适症状。结果0.45%、0.3%甲磺酸罗哌卡因和0.25%布比卡因麻醉效果强于0.25%甲磺酸罗哌卡因。0.45%甲磺酸罗哌卡因术中出现2例呼吸困难。结论0.3%甲磺酸罗哌卡因与其他各组比较,在肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞具有起效快、作用完善、不良反应少的特点,为临床适用的适宜剂量。     

论著：不同浓度罗哌卡因用于腋路臂丛神经阻滞的研究

目的 探讨0．25％、0．3％、0．375％罗哌卡因用于臂丛神经阻滞的有效性和安全性，并与0．25％布比卡因对照。方法 选择ASA Ⅰ-Ⅱ级准备行上肢手术的病人80例，随机分为4组，每组20例，分别用0．25％、0．3％、0．375％罗哌卡因和0．25％布比卡因40ml行臂丛神经阻滞，观察病人有无不适症状，并分别对感觉和运动进行评价。结果 随着浓度增加罗哌卡因麻醉强度依次增加，40ml0．25％罗哌卡因麻醉强度明显低于0．25％布比卡因，且满意率低，仅为85％；将罗哌卡因浓度提高到0．375％，显示出与0．25％布比卡因相当的麻醉强度，满意率则提高到100％。结论 0．25％罗哌卡因用于臂丛神经阻滞起效慢、满意率低，不是临床使用的适宜浓度；0．3％、0．375％罗哌卡因起效快，作用完善，副作用少，可推荐用于长时间臂丛神经阻滞，而以0．375％罗哌卡因最为适宜。     

Intravenous regional anaesthesia with 0.5% prilocaine or 0.5% chloroprocaine

Ten healthy male volunteers received intravenous regional anaesthesia of the upper limb on two separate occasions using 40 ml of 0.5% prilocaine or 40 ml plain 0.5% chloroprocaine by random allocation. Using a double-blind method, the onset and recovery of sensory block was tested (pinprick) in the four main nerve areas. The onset and recovery of motor block was measured by squeezing a rubber balloon connected to a manometer. The symptoms after deflation of the tourniquet were recorded. Seven volunteers in both groups developed total anaesthesia in 20 min. Complete motor block occurred in 12.3 min with prilocaine and 11.3 min with chloroprocaine. Sensation recovered in all areas in 7.6 min with prilocaine and 10.0 min with chloroprocaine (ns). Motor function recovered in 8.4 and 12.0 min respectively (p less than 0.01). Six volunteers in the chloroprocaine group showed signs of venous irritation and/or antecubital urticaria in the test arm for 30-45 min after the deflation. Four volunteers in the chloroprocaine group had increased in heart rate (greater than 20%) and one of them short periods of junctional rhythm during the first 2 min after tourniquet deflation. Mild, short-lived CNS side effects occurred in both groups.     

Interscalene brachial plexus anesthesia with either 0.5% ropivacaine or 0.5% bupivacaine

BACKGROUND: To compare intra- and postoperative clinical properties of interscalene brachial plexus block performed with either 0.5% ropivacaine or 0.5% bupivacaine. METHODS: Experimental design: prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Setting: in patient at the University Hospital, Department of Orthopedic Surgery. Patients: 30 ASA physical status I-II patients scheduled for elective shoulder surgery. Interventions: interscalene brachial plexus block was performed using the multiple injection technique and a nerve stimulator by injecting 20 ml of either 0.5% ropivacaine (n = 15) or 0.5% bupivacaine (n = 15). Postoperative analgesia consisted of 100 mg intravenous ketoprofen, if required. A blind observer evaluated hemodynamic variables as well as sensory and motor blocks from the end of injection to achieve a surgical anesthesia (readiness for surgery: loss of pinprick sensation from C4 to C7 with the inability to elevate the operated limb against gravity). The time lasting from block placement to first requirement for postoperative pain medication was also recorded. RESULTS: No differences in anthropometric parameters and hemodynamic variables were observed throughout the study, and no signs of central nervous system (CNS) and cardiovascular toxicity, or other untoward events were reported in any patients. Readiness for surgery was obtained after 28 +/- 15 min with 0.5% bupivacaine and 22 +/- 8 min after 0.5% ropivacaine (p = NS). No differences in postoperative pain relief was observed between the two groups (11.1 +/- 5 hrs after 0.5% ropivacaine and 10.9 +/- 3.9 hrs after 0.5% bupivacaine, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed that 0.5% ropivacaine has clinical properties similar to those of 0.5% bupivacaine, when used for interscalene brachial plexus block, providing similarly long duration in postoperative pain relief. Compared with bupivacaine, ropivacaine has the further advantage of a lower potential for central nervous system and cardiovascular toxicity.     

A comparison of ropivacaine 0.5% and bupivacaine 0.5% for brachial plexus block

This study compared the effectiveness of 0.5% ropivacaine and 0.5% bupivacaine for brachial plexus block. Forty-eight patients received a subclavian perivascular brachial plexus block for upper-extremity surgery. One group (n = 24) received ropivacaine 0.5% (175 mg) and a second group (n = 24) received bupivacaine 0.5% (175 mg), both without epinephrine. Onset times for analgesia and anesthesia in each of the C5 through T1 brachial plexus dermatomes did not differ significantly between groups. Duration of analgesia and anesthesia was long (mean duration of analgesia, 13-14 h; mean duration of anesthesia, 9-11 h) and also did not differ significantly between groups. Motor block was profound, with shoulder paralysis as well as hand paresis developing in all of the patients in both groups. Two patients in each group required supplemental blocks before surgery. Ropivacaine 0.5% and bupivacaine 0.5% appeared equally effective in providing brachial plexus anesthesia.     

Onset of action between bupivacaine 0.5% and bupivacaine 0.5% plus fentanyl 75 mcg

This study tested the hypothesis that the addition of fentanyl 75 mcg to bupivacaine 0.5% at the onset of epidural anesthesia for cesarean section reduces the onset time for T4 sensory blockade. The study was conducted in a randomized, double-blind fashion. The same observer performed sensory testing using pain to pinprick. Fourteen ASA I patients scheduled for elective cesarean section had epidural catheters placed. Group 1 (n = 7) received bupivacaine 0.5%, and group 2 (n = 7) received bupivacaine 0.5% plus fentanyl 75 mcg. Patients 5′0″ to 5′4″ in height received 15 ml, and patients 5′5″ to 5′9″ received 20 ml of bupivacaine. There were no adverse effects on the neonate or clinically important changes in maternal hemodynamics. The maternal age, height, weight, and bupivacaine dose did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). For group 1, the mean times for sensory loss at T7, T6, T5, and T4 were 13.1 ± 3.8 minutes, 15.0 ± 4.0 minutes, 16.9 ± 4.3 minutes, and 19.3 ± 4.9 minutes, respectively; for group 2, the mean times were 8.1 ± 0.9 minutes, 9.9 ± 1.1 minutes, 11.3 ± 1.5 minutes, and 12.7 ± 2.0 minutes, respectively. Two factor analysis of variance between groups 1 and 2 showed a significant difference (p < 0.0001), representing a 35% reduction of mean onset time. The coefficient of variation of the mean onset times for group 1 subjects was 26.6% ± 1.7% and for group 2 subjects 12.7% ± 2.2% (p < 0.001), representing a 50% reduction in between-subject variation. The study demonstrates that the addition of fentanyl to bupivacaine is statistically and clinically significant at reducing the analgesic onset time for cesarean section compared with bupivacaine alone.     

0.75% and 0.5% ropivacaine for axillary brachial plexus block: a clinical comparison with 0.5% bupivacaine

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although ropivacaine has been extensively studied for epidural anesthesia, very few reports exist on brachial plexus block. We therefore decided to investigate the clinical features of axillary brachial plexus anesthesia with two different concentrations of ropivacaine (0.5% and 0.75%) and to compare the results with those obtained with 0.5% bupivacaine. METHODS: Three groups of patients were randomized and prospectively studied. They received, in a double-blind fashion, 32 mL of the local anesthetic solution into the midaxilla, by a nerve-stimulator technique. Onset time in each of the stimulated nerves was recorded both for the sensory and motor block. Peak time (ready to surgery), rate of supplemental blocks, need for intraoperative opioids, duration of sensory and motor block, postoperative analgesic requirements, and patient satisfaction were also recorded. RESULTS: The rate of complete sensory and motor block observed with both ropivacaine groups was higher at 10, 15, and 20 minutes postinjection (P < .001). The mean peak time was shorter with ropivacaine than with bupivacaine (R50 = 16.37 minutes, R75 = 14.7 minutes, B = 22.3 minutes, P < .05). The quality of the anesthesia was higher with ropivacaine, as measured by the intraoperative needs for opioids and the overall patient's satisfaction (P < .05). No significant differences were noted with all the other studied parameters. CONCLUSION: Ropivacaine showed advantages over bupivacaine for axillary brachial plexus block. Because no statistical differences were found between the two ropivacaine groups, we therefore conclude that 0.75% does not add benefit and that 0.5% ropivacaine should be used to perform axillary brachial plexus blocks.     

Comparison of epidural anaesthesia with ropivacaine 0.5% and bupivacaine 0.5% for Caesarean section

PURPOSE: To compare ropivacaine 0.5% with bupivacaine 0.5% for epidural anaesthesia for Caesarean section. METHODS: Healthy pregnant women, scheduled for elective Caesarean section were enrolled into this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. Epidural block was obtained with 20-30 ml of ropivacaine (group R) or bupivacaine (group B) and surgery started when anaesthesia was reached T6. Maternal heart rate and blood pressure and fetal heart rate were assessed before the test dose and at five minute intervals until the end of surgery. At the same intervals, sensory and motor block characteristics were determined. Apgar scores and Neurologic and Adaptive Capacity Scores (NACS) were determined after delivery. Adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were enrolled and data from 61 were available for analysis; 30 ropivacaine and 31 bupivacaine. Time from the end of the last injection to the start of surgery was 46 +/- 13 min (mean +/- SD) in gp R and 53 +/- 25 min in gp B (P:NS). The median duration of analgesia varied between 1.7 and 4.2 hr in gp R and between 1.8 and 4.4 hr in gp B (P:NS). In patients who developed Bromage 4 block, it persisted longer in those in gp B (2.5 hr) than in gp R (0.9 hr) (P < 0.05). The quality of analgesia was satisfactory in 27/29 patients (93%) in gp R and 27/31 patients (87%) in gp B (P:NS), although supplemental i.v. opioid was required in ten and seven patients, respectively. The most common adverse events in the mother were hypotension (63% gp R and 61% in gp B) (NS) and nausea (30% and 58%, in group R and B, respectively) (P = 0.05). Apgar scores were 7 after five minutes in all neonates. CONCLUSION: Ropivacaine 0.5% and bupivacaine 0.5% provided effective epidural anaesthesia for Caesarean section although supplementation with i.v. opioid was commonly required.     

Skin temperature during sympathetic block: a clinical comparison of bupivacaine 0.5% and ropivacaine 0.5% or 0.75%

Measurement of skin temperature can be used as an indicator of sympathetic blockade induced by neuraxial anaesthesia. The aim of the study was to test the skin temperature response to epidural administration of bupivacaine and different concentrations of ropivacaine. Forty-eight ASA class I-II patients undergoing herniorraphy were enrolled into a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Patients were randomly allocated to receive epidural anaesthesia with a single dose of 18 ml of bupivacaine 0.5% (n=16); ropivacaine 0.5% (n=16), or ropivacaine 0.75% (n=16). A temperature probe was positioned on the skin of the thigh and skin temperature registered before epidural anaesthesia, every 10 minutes for the first hour after the epidural injection and every hour for the following four hours. Sensory blockade was assessed by pinprick and motor blockade using the Bromage scale. No significant difference was observed in sensory or motor blockade. A skin temperature rise of 1 to 1.8 degrees C compared with basal values was observed in all patients within the first hour. Temperature returned to basal values within four hours in the ropivacaine 0.5% group, within five hours in the ropivacaine 0.75% group, and remained 1 degrees C higher after five hours in the bupivacaine 0.5% group (P<0.01). The duration of sympathetic block is significantly shorter with ropivacaine than with bupivacaine.     

A double-blind randomised comparison of ropivacaine 0.5%, bupivacaine 0.375% - lidocaine 1% and ropivacaine 0.5% - lidocaine 1% mixtures for cataract surgery

This study evaluated the efficacy and side-effects of plain ropivacaine compared with ropivacaine-lidocaine and bupivacaine-lidocaine mixtures for peribulbar blocks in cataract surgery. Ninety patients were randomly allocated to three groups and received peribulbar blockade using one of the three solutions. Speed of onset and quality of blockade were assessed using akinesia, surgical satisfaction and patient satisfaction. Complications and cardiovascular side-effects were noted. There was a slower onset of akinesia using ropivacaine alone, although at 10 min after injection all groups were equal in this respect. There was no difference in surgical or patient satisfaction between the groups. There were no differences in pain on injection, preblock and postblock blood pressure, heart rate or oxygen saturation. The optimal time to surgical incision after peribulbar blockade is not less than 15 min and plain ropivacaine fulfils this criterion.