氯普鲁卡因、布比卡因和罗哌卡因在下肢手术腰-硬联合麻醉中的比较

目的比较氯普鲁卡因、布比卡因和罗哌卡因在下肢手术腰-硬联合麻醉(CSEA)中的应用效果。方法择期行髋关节及以下部位手术患者300例,随机均分成三组:氯普鲁卡因组(C组)、布比卡因组(B组)和罗哌卡因组(R组),蛛网膜下腔分别给予1.5%氯普鲁卡因、0.5%布比卡因和0.5%罗哌卡因各2 ml。记录患者感觉阻滞起效时间、平面固定时间、阻滞平面、腰麻持续时间和运动阻滞效果。结果 C组阻滞平面固定时间、腰麻持续时间明显短于B、R组(P<0.05)。C组感觉阻滞起效时间短于B组,但长于R组(P<0.05)。C组最高阻滞平面明显高于B、R组(P<0.05)。结论与0.5%罗哌卡因和0.5%布比卡因比较,1.5%氯普鲁卡因具有起效快、阻滞完善和运动阻滞效果弱的特点,小剂量氯普鲁卡因可用于手术时间较短的CSEA中的脊麻。     

罗哌卡因与布比卡因用于硬膜外阻滞麻醉效果的Meta分析

目的 评价罗哌卡因在硬膜外阻滞麻醉应用中的效果与安全性. 方法 检索PubMed、中国学术期刊全文等数据库中罗哌卡因与布比卡因在硬膜外阻滞麻醉的对比研究,利用Meta分析专用软件RevMan 5.0进行系统评价,重点分析罗哌卡因与布比卡因在感觉阻滞起效时间、运动阻滞恢复时间以及低血压发生率间的差异. 结果 12项研究纳入Meta分析,其中罗哌卡因组362例,布比卡因组377例.罗哌卡因与布比卡因比较,具有较短的感觉阻滞起效时间(Z=2.24,P=0.02,I2=20.5％,P＞0.05),与运动阻滞恢复时间(Z=5.70,P＜0.01,I2=58.9％,P＞0.05),但两者低血压发生率差别无统计学意义(Z=1.06,P＞0.05,I22=0,P＞0.05).结论 罗哌卡因麻醉效果确切,运动阻滞恢复快,具有较高的硬膜外阻滞麻醉优越性.     

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。     

罗哌卡因与布比卡因在剖宫产腰硬联合麻醉中的应用分析

目的分析在剖宫产腰硬联合麻醉应用罗哌卡因与布比卡因的临床效果。方法将接受剖宫产的80例孕妇随机分为布比卡因组和罗哌卡因组,每组40例。分别应用罗哌卡因和布比卡因实施麻醉。观察2组的麻醉效果及不良反应。结果 2组患者感觉阻滞起效时间及麻醉效果优良率比较,差异无统计学意义(P 0. 05)。罗哌卡因组运动阻滞起效时间慢于布比卡因组,运动阻滞维持时间和运动恢复时间均短于布比卡因组,不良反应发生率低于布比卡因组,差异均有统计学意义(P 0. 05)。结论罗哌卡因与布比卡因在剖宫产腰硬联合麻醉中效果相当,但罗哌卡因术后恢复时间短,不良反应少。     

罗哌卡因和布比卡因用于老龄患者下肢手术麻醉中的对比研究

【摘要】 目的 探讨在老龄患者下肢手术的麻醉中等效剂量罗哌卡因和布比卡因麻醉效果以及对手术的影响。方法 选择拟行股骨颈骨折手术老龄患者50例,随机分为罗哌卡因组(R组)和布比卡因组(B组)。两组均采用腰硬联合麻醉(CSEA),分别给予0.5%罗哌卡因2.5 mL和0.5%布比卡因2.5 mL注入蛛网膜下腔。术中麻醉效应不足时硬膜外给予2%利多卡因。术中监测呼吸循环状况,评估麻醉效果,并观察不良反应。结果 两组麻醉效果,最高阻滞平面及不良反应的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),B组的血压下降更加明显(P<0.05),R组下肢感觉阻滞起效更慢,持续时间更短(P<0.05),下肢运动阻滞程度显著低于B组(P<0.05)。结论 罗哌卡因和布比卡因在老龄患者下肢手术的腰硬联合麻醉都有效,罗哌卡因对循环系统影响更小,运动神经阻滞更轻且恢复迅速,更适合老龄患者下肢手术麻醉中的应用。     

不同小剂量低浓度罗哌卡因用于老年患者腰-硬联合麻醉的研究

目的 观察不同小剂量罗哌卡因用于老年患者腰-硬联合麻醉对下肢手术的可行性.方法 择期下肢手术的老年患者120例,随机分为三组,每组40例.A组:0.5%罗哌卡因5～7.5mg+10%葡萄糖0.5ml;B组:0.75%罗哌卡因5～7.5mg +10%葡萄糖0.5ml;C组:0.75%罗哌卡因8～10mg+10%葡萄糖0.5ml.观察感觉阻滞、运动阻滞起效时间和最高时间,最高麻醉阻滞平面,痛觉及运动阻滞维持时间,不良反应及血流动力学等.Bromage法评定运动神经阻滞程度.连续监测SBP、DBP、HR、SpO2、ECG.结果 随着罗哌卡因浓度剂量的降低,感觉、运动阻滞起效时间和最大阻滞时间延长,维持时间缩短;与C组比较,A、B组感觉、运动阻滞起效时间、最大时间、维持时间差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05),A与B组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).三组运动阻滞的Bromage评分组差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).术中低血压使用麻黄碱A组为0,B、C组均使用麻黄碱,但这两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),三组均未发生呕吐、头痛和神经系统症状.结论 0.5%罗哌卡因5～7.5mg+10%葡萄糖0.5ml配方可安全应用于蛛网膜下腔阻滞,适应于老年患者下肢手术,是一种较安全有效的麻醉方法.     

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。     

不同浓度罗哌卡因蛛网膜下腔麻醉在肛周手术中的应用

探讨不同剂量罗哌卡因蛛网膜下腔阻滞麻醉在肛周手术中的效果。选择蛛网膜下腔阻滞麻醉下行肛周手术的患者93例,随机分为三组,每组31例。A组:采用0.75%罗哌卡因2.0 mL;B组:采用0.5%罗哌卡因2.0 mL;C组:采用0.25%罗哌卡因2.0 mL。观察并记录麻醉起效时间、麻醉效果、术后运动阻滞及尿潴留发生情况。三组患者感觉阻滞起效时间及麻醉优良率比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。术毕时下肢运动阻滞0~I级者:A组(31/31,100.0%)和B组(10/31,32.3%)明显高于C组(4/31,12.9%,P0.05)。尿潴留发生率:C组(2/31,6.5%)明显低于A组(7/31,22.6%)和B组(11/31,35.5%,P0.05)。采用0.25%罗哌卡因2.0 mL蛛网膜下腔阻滞麻醉行肛周手术,麻醉效果确切、下肢运动神经阻滞轻且尿潴留发生率低。     

不同比重罗哌卡因腰麻在妇产科手术中的应用比较

目的 :探讨不同比重 1 0mg罗哌卡因用于妇科手术的麻醉效果和并发症发生率 ,并与布比卡因比较。方法 :37例妇科择期手术病人 ,年龄 2 2～ 6 0岁 ,体重 50～ 70kg ,ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级 ,随机分为 3组 :R1组 (罗哌卡因重比重液组 ) :罗哌卡因 1 0mg + 5%葡萄糖 1ml+麻黄素 1 5mg共 2 .5ml重比重液 ;R2 组 (罗哌卡因轻比重液组 ) :罗哌卡因 1 0mg +注射用水 3.5ml+麻黄素 1 5mg共 5ml轻比重液 ;B组 (布比卡因重比重液组 ) :布比卡因 7.5mg + 5%葡萄糖 1ml+麻黄素 1 5mg共 2 .5ml重比重液。采用腰麻 -硬膜外联合穿刺 ,成功后将不同局麻药在 30s内注入蛛网膜下腔。观察麻醉起效时间、最高麻醉平面及到达时间、运动阻滞分级、术中镇痛肌松情况 ,麻醉消退时间及术中低血压、恶心、呕吐、术后头痛发生率。对给药后 2 0min平面不足T10 者硬膜外追加 0 .5%罗哌卡因和 1 %利多卡因以满足手术要求。结果 :麻醉起效时间、最高麻醉平面及到达时间组间比较无差异 ,但R2 组显示单边阻滞者多于R1组和B组 ,且需辅以硬膜外给药例数多于R1和B组 ;手术开始时间R1组 ( 1 2min)早于R2 组 ( 1 7.8min)和B组 ( 1 5min) ;术中镇痛、肌松效果 ,单纯蛛网膜下腔阻滞比较 ,R1组与B组相同 ,R2 组镇痛完善例数明显低于R1组和B组 ,辅助硬膜外给药     

不同组成5g/L罗哌卡因10mg用于蛛网膜下腔阻滞的临床比较

目的观察不同组成的5 g/L罗哌卡因10 mg蛛网膜下腔阻滞时感觉、运动神经阻滞的效果。方法下腹部及以下手术患者36例,ASA分级Ⅰ~Ⅱ,随机分为3组（n=12）,腰硬联合麻醉下,蛛网膜下腔给药。A组注入10 g/L罗哌卡因1 ml＋生理盐水1 ml,B组注入10 g/L罗哌卡因1 ml＋注射用水1 ml,C组注入10 g/L罗哌卡因1 ml＋100 g/L葡萄糖1 ml。结果A、B组间感觉、运动神经阻滞无差异;A、B组感觉、运动神经阻滞的起效时间及最大运动阻滞时间均慢于C组,最高感觉阻滞平面与最大运动阻滞程度均低于C组（P〈0.05）。结论5 g/L罗哌卡因10 mg蛛网膜下腔阻滞时,加入100 g/L葡萄糖缩短了感觉与运动阻滞的起效时间,提高了感觉阻滞的平面及运动阻滞的程度。     

Spinal anesthesia: comparison of plain ropivacaine, bupivacaine and levobupivacaine for lower abdominal surgery

This study was performed to compare the anesthetic efficacy and safety of three local anesthetic agents: racemic bupivacaine and its two isomers: ropivacaine and levobupivacaine, in patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery. One hundred-twenty patients, ASA I-III, were randomized to receive an intrathecal injection of one of three local anesthetic solutions. Group A (n = 40) received 3 ml of isobaric bupivacaine 5 mg/ml (15 mg). Group B (n = 40) received 3 ml of isobaric ropivacaine 5 mg/ml (15 mg). Group C (n = 40) received 3 ml of isobaric levobupivacaine 5 mg/ml (15 mg). The onset and duration of sensory block at dermatome level T8, maximum upper spread of sensory block, time for 2-segment regression of sensory block as well as the onset, intensity and duration of motor block were recorded, as were any adverse effects, such as bradycardia, hypotension, hypoxia, tremor, nausea and/or vomiting. Time to unassisted standing up and voluntary micturition was also recorded. The onset of motor block was significantly faster in the bupivacaine group compared with that in the ropivacaine group and almost the same of that in the levobupivacaine group (P < 0.05). Ropivacaine presented a shorter duration of both motor and sensory block than bupivacaine and levobupivacaine (P < 0.05). Bupivacaine required more often the use of a vasoactive drug (ephedrine) compared to both ropivacaine and levobupivacaine and of a sympathomimetic drug (atropine) compared to the ropivacaine group.     

罗哌卡因蛛网膜下腔阻滞在剖宫产术中的应用

目的观察不同浓度罗哌卡因用于蛛网膜下腔阻滞剖宫产术的麻醉效能、母婴安全和相关不良反应。方法采用随机双盲法,将60例剖宫产手术的足月单胎产妇均分为三组：0．5％罗哌卡因组（L1组）,0．75％罗哌卡因组（L2组）和0．5％布比卡因组（C组）。记录蛛网膜下腔阻滞后产妇的感觉阻滞和运动阻滞的起效和持续时间、麻醉质量评价、恶心呕吐等不良反应及术中HR、BP、SpO2和新生儿1min和5min Apgar评分。结果L1和L2组比C组起效慢,阻滞平面低,平面固定时间长。L2组感觉阻滞时间比L1组和C组长。L2组和C组肌松评分优于L1组。运动神经阻滞改良Bromage评分,L1组〈k组〈C组（P〈0．05）。三组术中低血压及其他不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义。结论0．75％罗哌卡因用于蛛网膜下腔阻滞剖宫产时,其麻醉效能弱于0．5％布比卡因,而强于0．5％罗哌卡因,三者均具有较好的安全性。     

Hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine for cesarean delivery: a comparison to hyperbaric bupivacaine.

We evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of spinal anesthesia with 0.5% hyperbaric ropivacaine compared with 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine for elective cesarean delivery. Sixty healthy, full-term parturients were randomly assigned to receive either 12 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine or 18 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric ropivacaine intrathecally. There were no significant differences in demographic or surgical variables or neonatal outcomes between groups. Onset time of sensory block to T10 or to peak level was later in the Ropivacaine group (P < 0.05). The median (range) peak level of analgesia was T3 (T1-5) in the Bupivacaine group and T3 (T1-4) in the Ropivacaine group. Time for sensory block to recede to T10 did not differ between groups. Duration of sensory block was shorter in the Ropivacaine group (188.5 +/- 28.2 min vs 162.5 +/- 20.2 min; P < 0.05). Complete motor block of the lower extremities was obtained in all patients. Ropivacaine also produced a shorter duration of motor blockade than bupivacaine (113.7 +/- 18.6 min vs 158.7 +/- 31.2 min; P < 0.000). The intraoperative quality of anesthesia was excellent and similar in both groups. Side effects did not differ between groups. Eighteen milligrams of 0.5% hyperbaric ropivacaine provided effective spinal anesthesia with shorter duration of sensory and motor block, compared with 12 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine when administered for cesarean delivery Implications: Eighteen milligrams of 0.5% hyperbaric ropivacaine provided effective spinal anesthesia with shorter duration of sensory and motor block, compared with 12mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine when administered for cesarean delivery.     

Clinical Effects and Maternal and Fetal Plasma Concentrations of Epidural Ropivacaine Versus Bupivacaine for Cesarean Section

Background: Ropivacaine is a new amide local anesthetic structurally similar to bupivacaine and mepivacaine. Previous studies showed that ropivacaine has a similar clinical effect as bupivacaine with regard to sensory anesthesia and slightly less motor blockade than bupivacaine. Ropivacaine appears to be less cardiotoxic and arrhythmogenic than bupivacaine. The clinical and pharmacokinetic effects of 0.5% ropivacaine (5 mg/ml) versus 0.5% bupivacaine (5 mg/ml) when used epidurally for elective cesarean section were investigated.

Methods: Using a randomized, double-blind study design, 60 ASA physical status 1 or 2 term parturients presenting for elective cesarean section received either 0.5% bupivacaine (150 mg) or 0.5% ropivacaine (150 mg) epidurally in appropriate fractionated doses over a 10-min period. Onset, duration, and regression of sensory and motor blockade were noted until complete resolution was observed. Quality of intraoperative anesthesia and abdominal wall muscle relaxation were noted. Maternal plasma concentrations of local anesthetic were determined before anesthetic administration and 5, 10, 20, 30, and 60 min and 2, 3, 6, 8, 12, and 24 h after drug injection in 20 subjects. Umbilical cord blood was obtained at time of delivery for acid-base values and determination of the free and total plasma concentration of local anesthetic. Neonates also were examined for neurobehavioral assessments by Scanlon's and Neurologic and Adaptive Capacity Scores at 2 and 24 h after delivery.

Results: All patients received satisfactory anesthesia for operation. The onset, duration, and regression of sensory blockade were similar for both groups. Onset of degree 1 and 2 motor blockade was faster, and duration of degree 1 motor block was longer in the group receiving bupivacaine. Hemodynamic sequelae were similar between groups. All neonates had 5-min Apgar scores of 7 or greater and normal acid-base values and neurobehavioral assessments. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed that the Cmax was similar for both drugs (1.3 plus/minus 0.09 for ropivacaine and 1.1 plus/minus 0.09 micro gram/ml for bupivacaine). The T1/2 of the terminal decline in plasma concentration was shorter for ropivacaine versus bupivacaine (5.2 plus/minus 0.60 versus 10.9 plus/minus 1.08 h, respectively; P < 0.01). The free (i.e., unbound) concentrations of ropivacaine were approximately twice those of bupivacaine in both maternal and neonatal blood at the time of delivery. The ratio of umbilical vein to maternal vein concentration of unbound drug was 0.72 for ropivacaine and 0.69 for bupivacaine.     

A multicentre trial of ropivacaine 7.5 mg·ml−1 vs bupivacaine 5 mg·ml−1 for supra clavicular brachial plexus anesthesia

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of ropivacaine 7.5 mg x ml(-1) with bupivacaine 5.0 mg x ml(-1) for subclavian perivascular brachial plexus block. METHODS: After informed consent, 104 ASA I-III adults participated in a randomized, double-blind, multi-center trial to receive 30 ml of either ropivacaine 7.5 mg x ml(-1) or bupivacaine 5.0 mg x ml(-1) for subclavian perivascular brachial plexus block prior to upper limb surgery. Onset and duration of sensory and motor block in the distribution of the axillary, median, musculo-cutaneous, radial and ulnar nerves were assessed. RESULTS: Onset times and duration of sensory and motor block were similar between groups. Mean duration of analgesia for the five nerves was between 11.3 and 14.3 hr with ropivacaine and between 10.3 and 17.1 hr with bupivacaine. Quality of muscle relaxation judged as excellent by the investigators was not significantly different (ropivacaine - 35/49, bupivacaine - 30/49). The median time to first request for analgesia was comparable between the two groups (11-12 hr). One patient developed a grand mal seizure shortly after receiving bupivacaine and recovered consciousness within 30 min. There were no serious adverse events in the ropivacaine group. CONCLUSIONS: Thirty ml ropivacaine 7.5 mg x ml(-1) (225 mg) produced effective and well tolerated brachial plexus block of long duration by the subclavian perivascular route. In this study, the results were similar to those of 30 ml bupivacaine 5.0 mg x ml(-1).     

Lumbar plexus and sciatic nerve block for knee arthroplasty: comparison of ropivacaine and bupivacaine

PURPOSE: Information about the onset time and duration of action of ropivacaine during a combined lumbar plexus and sciatic nerve block is not available. This study compares bupivacaine and ropivacaine to determine the optimal long-acting local anaesthetic for lumbar plexus and sciatic nerve block in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: Forty adult patients scheduled for unilateral total knee arthroplasty, under lumbar plexus and sciatic block were entered into this double-blind randomized study. Patients were assigned (20 per group) to receive lumbar plexus block using 30 ml of local anaesthetic and a sciatic nerve block using 15 ml of local anaesthetic with either bupivacaine 0.5% or ropivacaine 0.5%. All solutions contained fresh epinephrine in a 1:400,000 concentration. Every one minute after local anaesthetic injection, patients were assessed to determine loss of motor function and loss of pinprick sensation in the L1-S1 dermatomes. The time to request first analgesic was documented from the PCA pump. This time was used as evidence of block regression. RESULTS: Blocks failed in four patients in each group. The mean onset time of both motor and sensory blockade was between 14 and 18 min in both groups. Duration of sensory blockade was longer in the bupivacaine group, 17 +/- 3 hr, than in the ropivacaine group, 13 +/- 2 hr (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: We conclude that bupivacaine 0.5% and ropivacaine 0.5% have a similar onset of motor and sensory blockade when used for lumbar plexus and sciatic nerve block. Analgesic duration from bupivacaine 0.5% was prolonged by four hours compared with an equal volume of ropivacaine 0.5%.     

Intrathecal ropivacaine for ambulatory surgery.

BACKGROUND: The rationale of this study was to evaluate intrathecal ropivacaine for ambulatory surgery. METHODS: One hundred fifty patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 scheduled for knee arthroscopy were studied. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 4 ml of one of five isobaric intrathecal solutions: Patients in group 1 (n = 30) received 8 mg of bupivacaine; patients in group 2 (n = 30) received 8 mg ropivacaine; patients in group 3 (n = 30) received 10 mg ropivacaine; patients in group 4 (n = 30) received 12 mg ropivacaine; and patients in group 5 (n = 30) received 14 mg ropivacaine. The level and duration of sensory anesthesia were recorded along with the intensity and duration of motor block. Patients were interviewed to identify transient neurologic symptoms. RESULTS: Intrathecal ropivacaine 10 mg produced shorter sensory anesthesia and motor blockade than bupivacaine 8mg (152 +/- 44 min and 135 +/- 41 min vs. 181 +/- 44 min and 169 +/- 52 min, mean +/- SD; P < 0.05). However, the quality of intraoperative analgesia was significantly lower in the 10-mg ropivacaine group (P < 0.05). Ropivacaine 12 mg produced sensory and motor block almost comparable to bupivacaine 8 mg. Ropivacaine 14 mg produced sensory and motor block comparable to ropivacaine 12 mg but significantly increased the time to void. No sign of transient radicular irritation were noted. CONCLUSION: Intrathecal ropivacaine 12 mg is approximately equivalent to bupivacaine 8 mg. At this dose, ropivacaine offers no significant advantage compared with bupivacaine.     

轻比重罗哌卡因单侧腰麻用于单侧下肢创伤手术对PCEA的影响

目的 观察轻比重罗哌卡因单侧腰麻用于下肢创伤手术患者的麻醉效果及其对硬膜外自控镇痛(PCEA)的影响.方法 ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级下肢创伤手术患者120例,随机均分为L1、L2、W1、W2四组.L1、L2组分别用轻比重罗哌卡因7.5～15.0 mg、15.0～22.5 mg,W1、W2组分别用重比重罗哌卡因7.5～15.0 mg、15.0～22.5 mg.术后用罗哌卡因150 mg+舒芬太尼0.05 mg+阿扎司琼10 mg+生理盐水至100 ml行PCEA.记录两组麻醉效果、不良反应,术始、术中及PCEA结束时双下肢的Bromage评分.结果 L1、L2、W2组麻醉效果优于W1组(P＜0.05).L1、L2组感觉、运动阻滞起效时间明显短于W1、W2组(P＜0.05).L1组各时点健肢Bromage评分明显低于患肢(P＜0.05).L1组低血压、尿潴留发生率明显低于L2、W2组(P＜0.05).结论 下肢创伤手术使用0.3％轻比重罗哌卡因7.5～15.0 mg单侧腰麻,麻醉效果满意,术后PCEA期间运动阻滞仅限于患肢,血流动力学稳定,不良反应发生率低,患者总体满意度高.     

硫酸镁在肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞上肢手术中的应用

目的观察超声引导下硫酸镁肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞(ISBPB)对上肢手术麻醉效果和镇痛时间的影响。方法选择ISBPB复合喉罩全麻拟行上肢手术的患者54例,男34例,女20例,年龄37~73岁,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,随机均分为两组:硫酸镁组(M组),超声引导下ISBPB,用药0.5%罗哌卡因8ml(40mg)加10%硫酸镁2ml(0.5g);对照组(N组),超声引导下ISBPB,用药0.5%罗哌卡因8ml加生理盐水2ml(40mg)。待神经阻滞完全起效后,静脉诱导插入喉罩通气,术中七氟醚(呼末MAC 0.8)维持。分别记录局麻药注射后感觉和运动阻滞的起效时间和持续时间,术后镇痛时间,术后4、8、12、24h的疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)以及术后不良反应。结果两组感觉和运动阻滞起效时间差异无统计学意义,M组的感觉阻滞持续时间和镇痛时间明显长于N组(P0.05)。术后8、12、24h M组的VAS评分明显低于N组(P0.05)。两组的术后补救用镇痛药、芬太尼用量差异无统计学意义。两组恶心呕吐的发生率差异无统计学意义。所有患者均未出现肌力减弱、麻木、瘙痒、寻麻疹等不良反应。结论超声引导下ISBPB注射0.5%罗哌卡因复合硫酸镁能延长感觉阻滞持续时间,降低术后疼痛程度,延长镇痛时间。     

Intrathecal Ropivacaine for Ambulatory Surgery: A Comparison between Intrathecal Bupivacaine and Intrathecal Ropivacaine for Knee Arthroscopy

Background: The rationale of this study was to evaluate intrathecal ropivacaine for ambulatory surgery.

Methods: One hundred fifty patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 scheduled for knee arthroscopy were studied. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 4 ml of one of five isobaric intrathecal solutions: Patients in group 1 (n = 30) received 8 mg of bupivacaine; patients in group 2 (n = 30) received 8 mg ropivacaine; patients in group 3 (n = 30) received 10 mg ropivacaine; patients in group 4 (n = 30) received 12 mg ropivacaine; and patients in group 5 (n = 30) received 14 mg ropivacaine. The level and duration of sensory anesthesia were recorded along with the intensity and duration of motor block. Patients were interviewed to identify transient neurologic symptoms.

Results: Intrathecal ropivacaine 10 mg produced shorter sensory anesthesia and motor blockade than bupivacaine 8mg (152 +/- 44 min and 135 +/- 41 min vs. 181 +/- 44 min and 169 +/- 52 min, mean +/- SD;P < 0.05). However, the quality of intraoperative analgesia was significantly lower in the 10-mg ropivacaine group (P < 0.05). Ropivacaine 12 mg produced sensory and motor block almost comparable to bupivacaine 8 mg. Ropivacaine 14 mg produced sensory and motor block comparable to ropivacaine 12 mg but significantly increased the time to void. No sign of transient radicular irritation were noted.