Local anaesthesia in elective inguinal hernia repair: a randomised, double-blind study comparing the efficacy of levobupivacaine with racemic bupivacaine.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of infiltration with local anaesthetics levobupivacaine and bupivacaine, during inguinal hernia repair. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomised study. SETTING: Postgraduate medical school, United Kingdom. SUBJECTS: 69 male patients aged 18 years or older. INTERVENTIONS: Wound infiltration with 0.25% levobupivacaine and 0.25% racemic bupivacaine. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Area under the curve (AUC) of visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for postoperative pain at rest in the supine position, rising from the supine to the sitting position, and walking, against time for both treatment groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between treatment groups for the AUC of VAS scores for postoperative pain, global verbal pain rating or time to first dose of analgesic medication. CONCLUSIONS: Levobupivacaine exerts a similar anaesthetic and analgesic effect to racemic bupivacaine when infiltrated both intraoperatively and during the early postoperative period for elective inguinal hernia repair.     

Analgesia and discharge following preincisional ilioinguinal and iliohypogastric nerve block combined with general or spinal anaesthesia for inguinal herniorrhaphy

BACKGROUND: Preincisional ilioinguinal and iliohypogastric nerve block (IINB) reduces postoperative analgesics after inguinal herniorrhaphy. The effect of an IINB on postoperative pain and discharge profile was therefore studied in day-surgery patients undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy with general or spinal anaesthesia. METHODS: Seventy ASA I-II adult patients scheduled for inguinal herniorrhaphy received an IINB before the surgical incision with 15 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine. In a randomized fashion half of them received general anaesthesia with spontaneous breathing via a laryngeal mask (GA-group) and the other half received spinal anaesthesia with 5 mg of bupivacaine diluted with sterile water to 2.5-ml volume (SPIN-group). In the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), pain was assessed on a scale from 0 to 10 (VAS) and ketorolac 30 mg i.v. (VAS < 5), or fentanyl 0.05 mg i.v. (VAS > or = 5) was administered as scheduled. In the day surgery unit and at home the analgesic was a tablet of ibuprofen 200 mg + codeine 30 mg (VAS > or = 3). RESULTS: Patients in the SPIN-group reported lower postoperative pain scores at 30, 60 min (P < 0.0001) and 120 min (P < 0.05) after surgery, and longer time to first analgesic use (P < 0.0001). Patients in the GA-group had a shorter time to discharge without voiding (P < 0.001) and with voiding (P < 0.05). After discharge, there were no significant differences between the groups regarding pain scores at rest and at walking, or the doses of analgesic. Adverse events were rare in both groups. CONCLUSION: Only a relatively short immediate analgesic benefit could be demonstrated by a combination of IINB with spinal anaesthesia compared with IINB combined with general anaesthesia. The use of general anaesthesia facilitated an earlier postoperative discharge than spinal anaesthesia.     

Postoperative analgesia requirements at home after inguinal hernia repair: effects of wound infiltration on postoperative pain

The aim of this study was to evaluate our postoperative pain protocol after ambulatory herniorrhaphy and to determine how infiltration with local anaesthetics would add to our management of postoperative pain. Two groups of 60 patients, scheduled for herniorrhaphy, received wound infiltration with 20 ml levobupivacaine 0.5% or saline 0.9%. Postoperatively, the patients regulated their own analgesic consumption and registered VAS scores, use of analgesics and side-effects in a diary for 5 days. The median time to first analgesic, the pain visual analogue scale scores, number of patients using no analgesic and the use of analgesic medication were significantly lower in the levobupivacaine group in the first 24 h, but not thereafter. Most patients used acetaminophen in the first 5 days after surgery and occasionally diclofenac. Only a minority used tramadol. Our multimodal pain protocol achieved reasonable results at rest, but a considerable number of patients experienced moderate to severe pain with movement.     

Levobupivacaine versus ropivacaine infiltration analgesia for mastopexy: a comparative study of 2 long-acting anesthetic drugs in infiltrative anesthesia for mastopexy

A prospective double-blind study was conducted to compare the analgesic properties of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine in a bilaterally symmetrical mastopexy model. Both of these 2 long-acting local anesthetic amides are associated with lower cardiac and central nervous system toxicity than racemic bupivacaine, a widely used agent for long-lasting perioperative analgesia in esthetic procedures. In this study, each of the 18 patients undergoing bilateral mastopexy under conscious sedation received preoperative infiltration with levobupivacaine in 1 breast and equal volume of ropivacaine in the other. Patients were requested to assess their pain separately in each side every 2 hours and for 12 hours postoperatively on a visual analog scale. Overall analgesia achieved up to 12 hours postoperatively was found to be statistically different between the 2 local anesthetic factors in favor of levobupivacaine. At 2 hours postoperatively, no difference was found between the 2 local anesthetic agents in terms of analgesic efficacy (P = 0.298). However, postoperative pain scores recorded after infiltration with levobupivacaine were significantly lower than pain scores for the ropivacaine-infiltrated sides (P<0.001) at all other timeframes. Both anesthetics provided satisfactory analgesia for at least 10 hours, but constantly low pain scores were recorded for levobupivacaine for 10 hours postoperatively, whereas for ropivacaine only for 6 hours. At 12 hours, 66% of patients needed oral analgesia for pain in the ropivacaine-infiltrated breast. It is concluded that levobupivacaine is more effective for local infiltrative analgesia in mastopexy than ropivacaine, providing longer-lasting postoperative analgesia.     

Effect of preincisional ilioinguinal and iliohypogastric nerve block on postoperative analgesic requirement in day-surgery patients undergoing herniorrhaphy under spinal anaesthesia

BACKGROUND: By choosing spinal anaesthesia instead of general anaesthesia, and by infiltrating the wound area with local anaesthetic the need for postoperative analgesics may be reduced. An ilioinguinal and iliohypogastric nerve block (IINB) in inguinal herniorrhaphy was, therefore, studied in a day surgery setting in combination with a spinal block. METHODS: One hundred ASA I-II adult patients scheduled for inguinal herniorrhaphy were given spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric 0.5% bupivacaine. In a randomized and blinded fashion half of them received an IINB 5 min before the surgical incision with 10 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine (B-IINB) and the other half with saline (S-IINB). All patients received ketoprofen 100 mg i.v. during surgery and another 100 mg 2-3 h postoperatively. The patients were observed for about 6 h in the day surgery unit before discharge. RESULTS: The results showed that in comparison with the S-IINB group, significantly fewer patients in the B-IINB group needed analgesics (P<0.01) and the amount required was also significantly less postoperatively, before discharge (about 6 h postoperatively) (P<0.05). The latency to the need for the first postoperative analgesic was shorter in the S-IINB patients (P<0.01). At home the VAS scores and the need for analgesics (oral ketoprofen 100 mg) were low with no differences between the groups. No complications occurred. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that no long-term analgesia could be demonstrated by a preincisional IINB performed during spinal anaesthesia in day-surgery inguinal herniorrhaphy patients. Thus, reduced analgesic requirement was seen only for about 6 h postoperatively.     

Levobupivacaine versus racemic bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for urological surgery

Racemic bupivacaine is the most common local anaesthetic used intrathecally. This prospective, randomized, double-blind study compared the clinical efficacy and motor block of 0.5% levobupivacaine with 0.5% racemic bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for urological surgery. The surgery required an upper level of sensory block of at least the tenth thoracic dermatome. Fifty patients were recruited (levobupivacaine group n = 24; bupivacaine group n = 26). Spinal anaesthesia was achieved with 2.6 ml of study solution injected in the subarachnoid space at the lumbar 3/4 interspace. One patient from the levobupivacaine group was excluded due to technical failure. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the quality of sensory and motor block or in haemodynamic change. Anaesthesia was adequate and patient satisfaction good in all cases. We conclude that 0.5% levobupivacaine can be used as an alternative to 0.5% racemic bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for surgery when a sensory block to at least T10 is required.     

Comparison of 0.75% levobupivacaine with 0.75% racemic bupivacaine for peribulbar anaesthesia

In a single centre, randomised, double-blind study 50 patients scheduled for intra-ocular surgery received 0.75% levobupivacaine or 0.75% racemic bupivacaine for peribulbar anaesthesia. There were no significant differences in the mean (SD) volume of levobupivacaine (11 (2.7) ml) or racemic bupivacaine (10 (2.6) ml) required, time to satisfactory block (levobupivacaine-13 (5.6) min; racemic bupivacaine-11 (4.4) min), peri-operative pain scores or frequency of adverse events between levobupivacaine and racemic bupivacaine. The safer side-effect profile of levobupivacaine may offer significant advantages in the elderly population undergoing cataract extraction in whom intercurrent disease is common.     

Post-herniorrhaphy pain in outpatients after preincision ilioinguinal-hypogastric nerve block during monitored anaesthesia care

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of an ilioinguinal-hypogastric nerve block (IHNB) with bupivacaine 0.25% on the postoperative analgesic requirement and recovery profile in outpatients undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy with local anaesthetic infiltration. Thirty consenting healthy men undergoing elective unilateral inguinal herniorrhaphy procedures were randomly assigned to receive an IHNB with either saline or bupivacaine according to a double-blind, IRB-approved protocol. All patients received midazolam, 2 mg iv, and fentanyl 25 μg iv, prior to injection of 30 ml of either bupivacaine 0.25% or saline through the oblique muscle approximately 1.5 cm medial to the anterior superior iliac spine. Subsequently, the surgeon infiltrated the incision site with a lidocaine 1% solution. Sedation was maintained during the operation with a variable-rate propofol infusion, 25–140 μg · kg^?1 · min^?1. No significant differences were noted in the intraoperative doses of lidocaine, propofol and fentanyl in the two treatment groups. However, the pain visual analogue score at 30 min after entering the PACU was lower in the bupivacaine (versus saline) group (P < 0.05). Although the times to ambulation (86 ± 18 vs 99 ± 27 min) and being judged “fit for discharge” (112 ± 49 vs 126 ± 30 min) were similar in the two groups, the bupivacaine-treated (vs saline) patients required less oral analgesic medication after discharge (46% vs 85%). We concluded that the use of an ilioinguinal-hypogastric nerve block with bupivacaine 0.25% as an adjuvant during inguinal herniorrhaphy under monitored anaesthesia care decreased pain in the PACU and oral analgesic requirements after discharge from the day-surgery unit.     

Perioperative rofecoxib plus local anesthetic field block diminishes pain and recovery time after outpatient inguinal hernia repair

In this study, we compared pain scores after inguinal herniorrhaphy in patients treated by preincisional local anesthetic field block (PL), or PL combined with perioperative rofecoxib, with controls who received standard care. Seventy-five patients having herniorrhaphy under general anesthesia were randomly assigned to receive a placebo pill preoperatively, and for 5 days postoperatively (CONT); preoperative bupivacaine field block and perioperative placebo (PL); preoperative field block plus rofecoxib, 50 mg preoperatively and for 5 days postoperatively (PLR). Bupivacaine infiltration in the wound at closure, IV fentanyl and acetaminophen/oxycodone were administered postoperatively to all. Discharge time, pain scores (0-10), analgesic use, and satisfaction scores (1-6) were compared using analysis of variance. PLR patients had lower maximum pain scores (worst pain) in the postanesthesia care unit (3.7 versus 5.3, P = 0.02) and at 24 h (5.3 versus 6.8, P = 0.03), were discharged 38 min sooner (P = 0.01), required 28% less oxycodone 0-24 h after discharge (P = 0.04), and reported higher satisfaction scores compared with CONT. Pain in PL was less than CONT for 30 min. There were no differences among the 3 groups after 24 h postoperatively. We conclude that perioperative rofecoxib with PL reduces in-hospital recovery time, decreases pain scores and opioid use, and improves satisfaction scores in the first 24 h after surgery.     

Clinical assessment of spinal and epidural anesthesia in inguinal hernia repair

Purpose. The current study was done to compare the effect of spinal and epidural anesthesia on surgical outcome measures of inguinal herniorrhaphy. Methods. Ninety-eight male patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair were randomized to either spinal (SA; n = 39) or epidural (EA; n = 59) anesthesia groups anesthetized with either glycosylated bupivacaine (20 mg) or 0.5 % bupivacaine (100 mg). Anesthesia onset time (AOT), postoperative stand-up time (SUT), first pain sensation time (FPT), operation time (OT), analgesic requirement (AR), hospital stay (HS), visual analogue scores of pain (VAS), per- and postoperative complications, and postanesthesia complications were recorded and compared with each other. Results. FPT was 6.6 ± 0.6 h and 3.1 ± 0.4 h and OT was 40 ± 2 min and 33.1 ± 1 min in the EA and SA groups, respectively (p < 0.05). SUT was also longer in EA group. VAS scores at 12 and 24 h were significantly higher in the EA group (28 ± 4 mm and 24 ± 5 mm in EA and 16 ± 4 and 5 ± 1 mm in SA; P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the SA and EA groups with respect to the other outcome measures that were considered. Conclusion. Spinal and epidural anesthesia show some differences from each other with respect to outcome measures such as OT, SUT, FPT, and 12- and 24-h VAS scores. Received: October 10, 2000 / Accepted: November 30, 2001     

A prospective trial of analgesia following endoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernioplasty

BACKGROUND: The extraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine has been shown to be superior to the use of a placebo for postoperative analgesia following endoscopic extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty. The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy of postoperative analgesia by local wound infiltration to instillation of the extraperitoneal space with bupivacaine. METHODS: Between 1 September 1999 and 2 June 2000, a total of 100 patients who underwent unilateral endoscopic extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasties were recruited to receive either local wound infiltration with 10 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine (group I, n = 50) or instillation of the extraperitoneal space with 40 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine after mesh placement (group II, n = 50). Daily postoperative pain was assessed by visual analogue pain score on a scale from 0 to 10 at rest and upon coughing. Total amount of oral analgesic consumed and clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: A comparison of daily pain scores of the two groups at rest and upon coughing showed no significant difference (p = ns). The mean number of oral analgesic tablets consumed were 3.2 +/- 0.5 (SEM) and 3.3 +/- 0.5 (SEM) in groups I and II, respectively (p = ns). During follow-up, asympatomatic groin collections were more common in group II (n = 4) than group I (n = 2) (p = ns). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to local wound infiltration with bupivacaine, the extraperitoneal instillation of bupivacaine did not bestow any additional analgesic benefits. Therefore, the routine infiltration of skin incisions with bupivacaine is recommended after endoscopic extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty.     

Does the addition of clonidine affect duration of analgesia of bupivacaine wound infiltration in inguinal hernia surgery?

We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind study to compare analgesia obtained by wound infiltration using 29 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine alone, or with the addition of clonidine hydrochloride 150 micrograms. A third group received bupivacaine wound infiltration with clonidine 150 micrograms i.m. to control for the systemic effects caused by absorption of clonidine. We studied 46 adults undergoing elective inguinal hernia repair. The general anaesthetic technique, postoperative analgesia and wound infiltration technique were standardized. There was no difference in time to first analgesic request or to total analgesic consumption between the three groups during the 24-h study. Visual analogue scores (VAS) at rest and after coughing were noted over a 24-h period. The only difference was higher VAS scores at rest at 24 h in the control group who received i.m. clonidine. We conclude that for elective inguinal hernia repair, postoperative analgesia obtained by bupivacaine wound infiltration was not improved by the addition of clonidine 150 micrograms.      

Levobupivacaine versus racemic bupivacaine for spinal anaesthesia in orthopaedic major surgery

AIM: Levobupivacaine, a new local anaesthetic, has been recently introduced into clinical practice because of its lower toxic effects for heart and central nervous system. It has been already investigated in epidural and loco-regional techniques, but more has to be known regarding its characteristics in spinal anaesthesia. The aim of our study was to compare clinical and anaesthetic features of levobupivacaine and racemic bupivacaine when intrathecally administered in 60 patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgical procedures. METHODS: Three ml of glucose-free levobupivacaine 0.5% (group L) or 3 ml of isobaric bupivacaine 0.5% (group B) were administered in 30 patients each. Sensory and motor blockades were evaluated by the pinprick test and a modified Bromage score, respectively. Vital parameters, postoperative VAS and rescue analgesia were recorded as well. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences between groups were observed either in anaesthetic potencies or postoperative pain. Either heart rate or mean arterial pressure slightly decreased in both groups, with no preoperative significant differences. Nevertheless, spinal puncture was accompanied by severe hypotension and bradycardia in 2 patients of group B. In both cases, hemodynamics were promptly and successfully treated, with no sequelae. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, levobupivacaine results a valid alternative to racemic bupivacaine for spinal anaesthesia, the latter remaining a cheap and effective local anaesthetic yet. Notwithstanding the complete absence of any significant hemodynamic complications in the patients of group L, further and larger studies are needed in order to assess if levobupivacaine is preferable to bupivacaine for minimizing the possible cardiovascular impact of spinal anaesthesia.     

Evaluation of dextran with local anaesthesia for short-stay inguinal herniorraphy.

A prospective randomised study of 40 patients undergoing unilateral inguinal herniorrhaphy under local anaesthesia was undertaken. Half the patients received the local anaesthetic (0.25% bupivacaine) mixed with dextran 40 solution. Subjective and objective assessments were made of the postoperative pain experienced in the first 48 h after operation. The use of 0.25% bupivacaine local inguinal block results in a postoperative pain-free period of approximately 10 h. Simple oral analgesics are adequate for postoperative pain relief in 87.5% of patients and are required relatively infrequently. The addition of dextran 40 to the local anaesthetic has no significant effect on its duration of action.     

Levobupivacaine versus racemic bupivacaine for thoracic and upper lumbar epidural anesthesia-analgesia in children

OBJECTIVES: We compared levobupivacaine to bupivacaine for epidural analgesia for thoracic or upper abdominal surgery in children. Our working hypothesis was that at equivalent doses levobupivacaine and bupivacaine behave in the same way. MATERIAL AND METHODS: ASA 1-4 patients between the ages of 5 and 16 years were randomized to a levobupivacaine or a bupivacaine group. After general anesthesia was induced, we inserted a thoracic or upper lumbar epidural catheter and administered a dose of 0.25% bupivacaine or levobupivacaine (1 mgxkg(-1)) while maintaining general anesthesia. Analgesia was provided with an epidural infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine or levobupivacaine with fentanyl. Fentanyl was used as a perioperative rescue analgesic and metamizole magnesium as a postoperative rescue analgesic. The epidural infusion was reduced by 25% each day beginning on the second day. We analyzed hemodynamic and respiratory variables, rescue analgesia, time until extubation and discharge from the recovery unit, complications associated with the technique, adverse effects, and degree of comfort achieved. RESULTS: We studied 64 patients; 33 received levobupivacaine and 31 bupivacaine. Mean (SD) duration of recovery unit stay was significantly longer in the bupivacaine group (4.2 [0.99] days) than in the levobupivacaine group (35 [0.6] days; P<.05). Significantly more patients needed perioperative rescue analgesia in the levobupivacaine group (n=6 [18.18%]) than in the bupivacaine group (n=3 [9.67%]; P<.01). After 48 hours, the need for postoperative rescue analgesia was significantly lower with levobupivacaine (P<.01). Motor block was significantly greater with bupivacaine (P<05). Adverse effects and complications included 2 cases of persistent bradycardia and 1 case of dural puncture with no subsequent clinical manifestations. CONCLUSIONS: This experience with epidural anesthesia for thoracic and upper abdominal surgery showed levobupivacaine and racemic bupivacaine to have similar profiles. Levobupivacaine, which is less toxic, could be used to replace bupivacaine in children.     

Caudal 0.2% ropivacaine is less effective during surgery than 0.2% levobupivacaine and 0.2% bupivacaine: a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that without the analgesic effects of volatile anesthetics, caudal 0.20% ropivacaine would be less effective during surgical stimulation than 0.20% bupivacaine or 0.20% levobupivacaine. This trial was designed to examine whether the combination of a caudal block with 0.20% ropivacaine and i.v. anesthesia resulted in reduced analgesic efficacy during surgery compared with caudal 0.20% levobupivacaine or 0.20% bupivacaine in children. METHODS: Ninety ASA I-II children between 1 and 7 years old, scheduled for inguinal hernia repair or orchidopexy under propofol anesthesia were randomized to receive a caudal block with 1 ml x kg(-1) of 0.2% bupivacaine, 0.2% ropivacaine or 0.2% levobupivacaine. The primary outcome measure of the study was the clinical efficacy of the caudal block during surgery. Secondary outcome measures were postoperative pain relief and residual motor blockade. RESULTS: Four children were excluded and 86 were analyzed. The proportion of children with effective caudal block during surgery was significantly higher in children receiving levobupivacaine (26/28) or bupivacaine (27/29) compared with patients receiving ropivacaine (21/29) (P = 0.03). There were no significant differences among groups in the analgesic onset time (P = 0.1), incidence of residual motor blockade (P = 0.4), number of patients requiring analgesia after operation or in the time from caudal injection to the first administration of analgesic medication (P = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Combined with propofol anesthesia, 0.2% levobupivacaine and 0.2% bupivacaine are more effective than 0.2% ropivacaine for caudal use in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair or orchidopexy.     

Local anaesthesia in inguinal herniorrhaphy: influence of dextran and saline solutions on duration of action of bupivacaine.

Because recent clinical trials have shown that dextran solutions can prolong the local anaesthetic action of 0.25% bupivacaine, a prospective double blind trial was performed in patients (n = 50) undergoing uncomplicated elective inguinal herniorrhaphy under local anaesthesia alone. Patients were randomised prior to infiltration of local anaesthesia into 2 groups: 0.5% bupivacaine (30 ml) diluted with an equal volume of either 0.9% saline or an equal volume of dextran 110. There was no significant difference in duration nor degree of postoperative anaesthesia between the two groups. Dextran solutions were found to be significantly more acidic than saline solutions and the possible effects of this on bupivacaine kinetics are discussed.     

Comparison of low-dose intrathecal and epidural morphine and bupivacaine infiltration for postoperative pain control after surgery for lumbar disc disease

This prospective, blinded, placebo-controlled study was performed to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of low-dose intrathecal and epidural morphine with paraspinal muscle infiltration of bupivacaine in lumbar discectomy cases. Eighty ASA I-III adult patients undergoing elective surgery for lumbar disc disease were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomized to four groups by envelopes. Study groups were as follows: group 1 (n = 20), intrathecal morphine 0.1 mg; group 2 (n = 20), epidural morphine 2 mg; group 3 (n = 20), 30 mL of bupivacaine 0.25% paraspinal muscle infiltration; group 4 (n = 20), 30 mL of saline paraspinal muscle infiltration before wound closure. Recorded parameters were time to response to painful and verbal stimuli and postoperative pain assessed at 30 minutes and 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Numeric Pain Scale (NPS). Hemodynamic data, sedation scores, and side effects were also recorded. Meperidine and naproxen sodium were used for postoperative analgesia. Follow-up was performed by a blinded investigator. Mean VAS scores were lower in groups 1 and 2 at 30 minutes (P < 0.05). Mean VAS score of group 2 was lower than that of group 4 at 4 hours postoperatively (P < 0.05). Mean NPS scores were lower in groups 1 and 2 at 2, 4, and 6 hours (P < 0.05) and in group 2 at 8 hours compared with the other groups. The number of patients requiring meperidine at early postoperative phase (0-6 hours) was less in groups 1 and 2 compared with groups 3 and 4 (P < 0.05).There were no statistically significant differences in the late postoperative analgesic requirements, after correction for multiple testing. In conclusion, low-dose intrathecal and epidural morphine provide lower postoperative pain scores and a reduction in early postoperative analgesic requirement with insignificant side effects compared with paraspinal bupivacaine or saline infiltration.     

Levobupivacaine caudal anesthesia in children: a randomized double-blind comparison with bupivacaine

BACKGROUND: Levobupivacaine is the pure S-enantiomer of bupivacaine. Despite obvious benefits in the event of accidental intravascular injection there has been no studies demonstrating a clinically significant benefit to levobupivacaine over racemic bupivacaine for pediatric regional anesthesia. Given the similar pharmacokinetic profiles of both drugs the studies to date have been underpowered to demonstrate what is likely to be a small difference in clinical effectiveness. Our aim was to determine if there are significant differences in the clinical effectiveness of levobupivacaine compared with racemic bupivacaine for caudal anesthesia in children having lower abdominal surgery. A secondary aim was to determine if there are differences in the incidence of postoperative motor blockade between these agents. METHODS: Three hundred and ten children ranging in age from 1 month to 10.75 years in age having lower abdominal surgery were enrolled. Patients were randomized in a double blind manner to receive a caudal block with either 0.25% bupivacaine (n = 152) or 0.25% levobupivacaine (n = 155) to a total volume of 1 ml x kg(-1). Motor blockade (modified Bromage scale) and postoperative pain or distress (FLACC behavioral scale for postoperative pain) were measured at predetermined time points during the subsequent 120 min. RESULTS: There were no significant adverse effects attributable to levobupivacaine. Success rates were defined as a lack of hemodynamic response to first surgical incision and low postoperative pain scores. At a mean duration of 5 min between block completion and first incision success for 1 ml x kg(-1) of 0.25% bupivacaine was 91% and 94% for 0.25% levobupivacaine. Satisfactory postoperative analgesia was present in 98% of patients after bupivacaine caudal anesthesia and 97.5% for levobupivacaine. At 30 min following caudal anesthesia the incidence of postoperative motor block with racemic bupivacaine was 84% and decreased to 7% at 120 min. For levobupivacaine motor block at 30 min postcaudal was present in 85% and decreased to 11% at 120 min. CONCLUSIONS: Levobupivacaine is an effective agent for caudal anesthesia in children at a recommended dose of 2.5 mg x kg(-1). The rapidity of onset was suitable for establishment of surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia was achieved in greater than 97.5% of patients. It appears to be of equivalent potency to racemic bupivacaine in children requiring lower abdominal surgery.     

Comparative study between Levobupivacaine and Bupivacaine for hernia surgery in the elderly

Background

The inguinal hernia is one of the most common diseases in the elderly. Treatment of this type of pathology is exclusively surgical and relies almost always on the use of local anesthesia. While in the past hernia surgery was carried out mainly by general anesthesia, in recent years there has been growing emphasis on the role of local anesthesia.

Methods

The aim of our study was to compare intra-and postoperative analgesia obtained by the use of levobupivacaine compared with that of bupivacaine. Bupivacaine is one of the main local anesthetics used in the intervention of inguinal hernioplasty. Levobupivacaine is an enantiomer of racemic bupivacaine with less cardiotoxicity and neurotoxicity. The study was conducted from April 2010 to May 2012. We collected data of forty male patients, aged between 73 and 85 years, who underwent inguinal hernioplasty with local anesthesia for the first time.

Results

Minimal pain is the same in both groups. Mild pain was more frequent in the group who used bupivacaine, moderate pain was slightly more frequent in the group who used levobupivacaine, and the same for intense pain. It is therefore evident how Bupivacaine is slightly less preferred after four and twenty four hours, while the two drugs seem to have the same effect at a distance of twelve and forty-eight hours. Bupivacaine shows a significantly higher number of complications, as already demonstrated by previous studies. The request for an analgesic was slightly higher in patients receiving levobupivacaine.

Conclusions

After considering all these elements, we can conclude that the clinical efficacy of levobupivacaine and racemic bupivacaine are essentially similar, when used under local intervention of inguinal hernioplasty.