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.

     

Levobupivacaine vs bupivacaine as infiltration anaesthesia in inguinal herniorrhaphy

We have compared the anaesthetic and analgesic efficacy of levobupivacaine with that of racemic bupivacaine in 66 male patients undergoing ambulatory primary inguinal herniorrhaphy. Patients were allocated randomly in a double-blind manner to local infiltration anaesthesia (0.25% w/v 50 ml) with either racemic bupivacaine (n = 33) or levobupivacaine (n = 33). Scores for intraoperative pain and satisfaction with anaesthesia were recorded, together with perception of postoperative pain and need for supplementary postoperative analgesic medications in the first 48 h after operation. Intraoperative satisfaction with the infiltration anaesthesia was similar, with median scores of 77 (levobupivacaine) and 80 (bupivacaine) (VAS; 100 mm = extremely satisfied). Time averaged postoperative pain scores (48 h) were 8 (levobupivacaine) and 10 (bupivacaine) in the supine position, 13 (levobupivacaine) and 12 (bupivacaine) while rising from the supine position to sitting, and 9 (levobupivacaine) and 13 (bupivacaine) while walking (VAS; 100 mm = worst pain imaginable) (ns). There was no difference in the use of peroral postoperative analgesics between the two groups. We conclude that racemic bupivacaine and its S-enantiomer levobupivacaine had similar efficacy when used as local infiltration anaesthesia in inguinal herniorrhaphy.      

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.     

A comparison of levobupivacaine 0.5% and racemic bupivacaine 0.5% for extradural anesthesia for caesarean section

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Bupivacaine is available as a racemic mixture of its enantiomers, dextrobupivacaine and levobupivacaine. Both in vitro and in vivo studies show that dextrobupivacaine has a greater inherent central nervous system (CNS) and cardiovascular toxicity than levobupivacaine. Clinical studies show levobupivacaine to have similar local anesthetic potency to the racemate. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of levobupivacaine compared with racemic bupivacaine for extradural anesthesia. METHODS: We studied 62 patients undergoing elective caesarean delivery who received 25 mL of either levobupivacaine 0.5% or bupivacaine 0.5%, extradurally, in a randomized, double-blind study. RESULTS: The 2 groups were similar in terms of time to block suitable for surgery, segmental spread, and duration of sensory block. However, lower-limb motor block was significantly longer in the levobupivacaine group but of significantly less intensity. CONCLUSIONS: Levobupivacaine produces an extradural block that is similar to bupivacaine, and is a suitable local anesthetic agent for caesarean delivery.     

Use of bupivacaine as block to relieve postoperative pain in pediatric orchiopexy and hernia repair

Bupivacaine was utilized for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing orchiopexy and hernia repair. In a study of 75 pediatric patients, ranging in ages from twelve months to twelve years, who had undergone orchiopexy and hernia repair during a three-year period, 42 received bupivacaine hydrochloride as a local infiltration block anesthesia to relieve postoperative pain; 33 patients did not receive bupivacaine. Patients receiving bupivacaine had less postoperative pain and were more comfortable when leaving the hospital within a few hours after surgery.     

Levobupivacaine combined with sufentanil and epinephrine for intrathecal labor analgesia: a comparison with racemic bupivacaine

We performed a randomized, double-blinded study to compare levobupivacaine with racemic bupivacaine for labor analgesia. Eighty term parturients received either levobupivacaine 0.125% or racemic bupivacaine 0.125%, to which was added sufentanil 0.75 microg/mL and epinephrine 1.25 microg/mL. As part of a combined spinal-epidural procedure, 2 mL of this mixture was initially injected intrathecally, and the same solutions were subsequently administered epidurally. For both combinations, onset until the first painless contraction was 4 to 5 min. Most patients were pain free during the second contraction. The duration of initial spinal analgesia was 93.5 +/- 20 min and 94.7 +/- 31 min for levobupivacaine and racemic bupivacaine, respectively. The duration of analgesia for the first epidural top-up dose was also similar in the two groups. Total local anesthetic requirements during labor were not different. The only major difference observed was the absence of motor impairment in levobupivacaine-treated parturients as compared with the Racemic Bupivacaine group, in which the incidence of a Bromage-1 motor block was 34%. Other side effects and obstetric or neonatal outcomes were not different between groups. Intrathecal levobupivacaine has a similar clinical profile as racemic bupivacaine, but at equal doses it produced less motor block. IMPLICATIONS: When used intrathecally and epidurally for labor analgesia, levobupivacaine had the same clinical profile as racemic bupivacaine, but at equal doses it produced less motor block.     

Clinical Effects and Maternal and Fetal Plasma Concentrations of 0.5% Epidural Levobupivacaine versus Bupivacaine for Cesarean Delivery

Background: Bupivacaine exists as a mixture of two enantiomers, levobupivacaine and dexbupivacaine. Data suggest that levobupivacaine has equal local anesthetic potency, with reduced potential for central nervous system and cardiovascular toxicity. The present study compares the efficacy of 0.5% levobupivacaine with 0.5% bupivacaine for epidural anesthesia in parturients undergoing elective cesarean delivery.

Methods: Sixty healthy obstetric patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery with epidural anesthesia completed the study. Patients were randomized to receive 30 ml of either 0.5% levobupivacaine or 0.5% bupivacaine in a double-blind fashion. The efficacy endpoint measures included onset, offset, and quality of anesthesia. Neonatal blood gas analyses, Apgar score determinations, and neurobehavioral examinations were performed. Venous samples for pharmacokinetic studies and serial electrocardiograms were obtained in 10 patients in each group.

Results: Levels of sensory block, motor block, muscle relaxation, and overall quality of anesthesia did not differ between groups. The frequency of hypotension was 84.4% in the levobupivacaine group and 100% for the bupivacaine group (P 相似文献   

Randomized, double-blind, phase III, controlled trial comparing levobupivacaine 0.25%, ropivacaine 0.25% and bupivacaine 0.25% by the caudal route in children

Background. The rationale for replacing racemic bupivacainewith the s-enantiomers levobupivacaine and ropivacaine is toprovide a wider margin of safety with the same analgesic efficacyand less postoperative motor block. In a randomized, double-blind,phase III, controlled trial we compared the caudal administrationof levobupivacaine 0.25% and ropivacaine 0.25% with bupivacaine0.25% in children. Methods. Ninety-nine ASA I–II children less than 10 yrold scheduled for elective sub-umbilical surgery were randomizedto receive caudal block with bupivacaine 0.25%, ropivacaine0.25% or levobupivacaine 0.25%. The primary outcome of the studywas the clinical efficacy of the caudal block during the operation.Secondary outcome measures were analgesic onset time, pain reliefafter the operation and residual motor blockade. Results. The proportion of children with effective analgesiaduring the operation was similar among groups. There were nosignificant differences in the analgesic onset time of the caudalblock. Bupivacaine produced a significant incidence of residualmotor block compared with levobupivacaine or ropivacaine atwake-up (P<0.01). There were no significant differences inthe number of patients receiving rescue analgesia after surgery.However, analgesic block lasted significantly longer in patientsreceiving bupivacaine (P=0.03). Conclusion. During sub-umbilical surgery, caudal levobupivacaine,ropivacaine and bupivacaine provided comparable analgesic efficacy.Bupivacaine produced a higher incidence of residual motor blockadeand a longer analgesic block than ropivacaine and levobupivacaine.      

两种局麻方法应用于腹股沟疝无张力修补术的比较

目的比较改良的局部神经阻滞麻醉和常规的局部神经阻滞麻醉在腹股沟无张力疝修补手术中的应用效果。方法临床选取2008年1月至6月收治的单侧腹股沟疝无张力修补手术的患者80例随机分为两组,一组使用经过改良的局部神经阻滞麻醉,一组使用常规的局部神经阻滞麻醉,比较两组的镇痛效果,手术时间,镇痛效果持续时间及手术后持续疼痛的发生率,判断两者的优劣。结果两者麻醉效果同样肯定,效果持续时间接近,但改良的局部神经阻滞麻醉操作时间较短,手术时间短,手术后持续疼痛发生率较低。结论综合比较显示,在腹股沟疝无张力修补手术中改良的局部神经阻滞麻醉方法优于常规的局部神经阻滞麻醉,应在临床推广使用。     

局部麻醉下腹膜前间隙修补术在老年腹股沟疝患者中应用体会

目的探讨局部麻醉下腹膜前间隙无张力疝修补术在老年腹股沟疝患者中应用的临床价值。方法回顾性分析2009年1月至2012年9月,聊城市人民医院局部神经阻滞麻醉下治疗老年腹股沟疝患者98例的临床资料。观察麻醉效果、手术时间、住院费用、平均住院日、术后并发症及近期随访情况。结果本组患者均手术顺利完成,麻醉效果满意,单侧平均手术时间（41±10）min,所有患者术后疼痛轻微,术后未使用止痛药物,平均住院费用（4367±215）元,平均住院时间（2．5±0．5）d。全组患者伤口均一期愈合,除2例术后阴囊浆液肿外,其他患者无术后并发症出现,随访6～44个月,无复发、切口感染和慢性疼痛等发生。结论局部神经阻滞麻醉下腹膜前间隙无张力修补老年腹股沟疝是一种理想的手术方式,具有安全、适应证广、创伤小、术后恢复快、并发症少和复发率低等特点。     

Safety and efficacy of extended-release bupivacaine local anaesthetic in open hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial

Background: Pain relief remains a major problem in hernia surgery. SABER‐Bupivacaine is an investigational extended‐release formulation of bupivacaine in a resorbable matrix, which may provide up to 72 h of local pain relief. Methods: A double‐blinded, randomized controlled trial was undertaken to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SABER‐Bupivacaine. Consented patients (n= 124) undergoing open inguinal hernia repair at five sites in Australia and New Zealand were randomized to receive either 2.5 (330 mg) or 5.0 mL (660 mg) of SABER‐Bupivacaine or SABER‐Placebo administered to the surgical wound at the end of the procedure. Analgesic efficacy and safety was evaluated. Results: SABER‐Bupivacaine appeared safe with no difference in the incidence of side effects compared with SABER‐Placebo. The 5.0 mL dose of SABER‐Bupivacaine reduced the mean area under the curve of pain intensity on movement compared with SABER‐Placebo (2.47 versus 3.60; P= 0.0033) and decreased the number of patients requiring supplemental opioids by 26% (although not statistically significant; P= 0.0909). Normal wound healing was reported throughout the trial and at 3‐ and 6‐month follow‐up in every treatment group. Conclusion: After open inguinal hernia repair, SABER‐Bupivacaine administered at the surgical site was safe and provided pain relief, reduced the need for supplemental (oral and parenteral) analgesia and did not impair wound healing.     

Effect of extraperitoneal bupivacaine analgesia in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernioplasty is significantly less painful than open repair, but it is not completely painless. Local anesthetics are thought to decrease postoperative pain when placed at the surgical site. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy of extraperitoneal bupivacaine treatment during laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair for the reduction of postoperative pain.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs that investigated the outcomes of extraperitoneal bupivacaine analgesia versus control in laparoscopic TEP hernia repair. Pain was assessed using a visual analog scale at 4–6 h and at 24 h following the surgery. The secondary outcomes included complications and analgesia consumption.

Results

We reviewed eight trials that included a total of 373 patients. We found no difference between the groups in postoperative pain reduction following laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair. The intensity of pain was not significantly different between the bupivacaine treatment group and the control group. The pooled mean differences in pain scores were ?0.26 (95 % CI ?0.72 to 0.21) at 4–6 h and ?0.47 (95 % CI ?1.24 to 0.29) at 24 h. No bupivacaine-related complications were reported.

Conclusion

Extraperitoneal bupivacaine treatment during laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernioplasty is not more efficacious for the reduction of postoperative pain than placebo.     

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.     

Evaluation of levobupivacaine passage to breast milk following epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery

BackgroundFollowing maternal administration, local anesthetics pass into breast milk. In the present study, we aimed to compare the passage of levobupivacaine and bupivacaine into breast milk following epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery.MethodsA total of 20 women undergoing elective cesarean delivery under epidural anesthesia were randomized to receive either 0.5% levobupivacaine or 0.5% racemic bupivacaine via an epidural catheter. Immediately before and 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 6 h, 12 h and 24 h after administration of epidural local anesthetic, maternal blood and breast milk samples were taken simultaneously. Drug concentrations in plasma and milk were determined via high-performance liquid chromatography. The infant’s drug exposure was determined by calculating milk/plasma ratios of levobupivacaine and bupivacaine.ResultsBoth levobupivacaine and bupivacaine were detected in breast milk 30 min after epidural administration. Concentrations of both agents showed constant and similar decreases in milk and plasma and were nearly undetectable at 24 h. The milk/plasma ratios were 0.34 ± 0.13 for levobupivacaine and 0.37 ± 0.14 for bupivacaine.ConclusionsBoth levobupivacaine and bupivacaine pass into breast milk following epidural administration. The concentration of both drugs was approximately three times lower in breast milk than in maternal plasma.     

Three concentrations of levobupivacaine for ilioinguinal/iliohypogastric nerve block in ambulatory pediatric surgery

Study ObjectiveTo compare the postoperative analgesia of three different concentrations of levobupivacaine for ilioinguinal/iliohypogastric (II/IH) block in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair.DesignDouble-blind, prospective, randomized, controlled trial.SettingOperating room and postoperative recovery area of a university hospital.Patients73 ASA physical status I and II children, aged one to 6 years, scheduled for outpatient inguinal hernia repair.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive one of three levobupivacaine concentrations: 0.125% (L0.125), 0.25% (L0.25), or 0.375% (L0.375). All patients received standard anesthesia with sevoflurane and II/IH nerve block.MeasurementsHeart rate (HR), non invasive blood pressure (NIBP), respiratory rate, end-tidal carbon dioxide concentration (ETCO₂), and oxygen saturation via pulse oximetry (SpO₂) were monitored during surgery. Postoperative pain scores with CHEOPS (Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale) and need for rescue analgesia postoperatively were measured and recorded.Main Results60 patients entered the postoperative observational period. The number of patients who received rescue analgesia was comparable in the three groups. In Group L0.125, mean CHEOPS score was significantly higher, and time to first administration of rescue analgesia was shorter, than in the other two groups (P < 0.05). Pain scores and time to first administration of rescue analgesia were comparable between Groups L0.25 and L0.375.ConclusionsII/IH nerve block using 0.4 mL kg^-1 of 0.25% levobupivacaine provided satisfactory postoperative pain relief after inguinal herniorraphy.     

Intraoperative epidural anesthesia and postoperative analgesia with levobupivacaine for major orthopedic surgery: a double-blind,randomized comparison of racemic bupivacaine and ropivacaine

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the onset time and duration of epidural anesthesia, and the quality of postoperative analgesia produced by levobupivacaine, racemic bupivacaine, and ropivacaine. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. SETTING: Inpatient anesthesia at a University Hospital. PATIENTS: 45 ASA physical status I, II, and III patients, undergoing elective total hip replacement. INTERVENTIONS: After standard intravenous midazolam premedication and infusion of 500 mL of Ringer's acetate solution, patients were randomly allocated to receive epidural block with 0.5% levobupivacaine (n = 15), 0.5% bupivacaine (n = 15), or 0.5% ropivacaine (n = 15). Postoperatively, after pinprick sensation recovered at T(t), a patient-controlled epidural infusion was provided with 0.125% levobupivacaine, 0.125% bupivacaine, or 0.2% ropivacaine, respectively (baseline infusion rate 5 mL/hr; incremental bolus 2 mL, lockout time: 20 min). Intravenous ketoprofen was also available for rescue analgesia if required. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The onset time of sensory block was 31 +/- 16 minutes with levobupivacaine, 25 +/- 19 minutes with bupivacaine, and 30 +/- 24 minutes with ropivacaine (p = 0.98), after a median (range) volume of 15 (10-18) mL in Group Levobupivacaine, 14 (10-18) mL in Group Bupivacaine, and 15 (10-18) mL in Group Ropivacaine (p = 0.85). Six patients in the ropivacaine group (40%) showed an intraoperative Bromage score <2 as compared with only three patients of Group Levobupivacaine (20%) and no patient of Group Bupivacaine (p = 0.02). Recovery of pinprick sensation at T(t) occurred after 214 +/- 61 minutes with levobupivacaine, 213 +/- 53 minutes with bupivacaine, and 233 +/- 34 minutes with ropivacaine (p = 0.26). A similar degree of pain relief was observed in the three groups without differences in local anesthetic consumption and need for rescue analgesia. Motor blockade progressively resolved without differences among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Levobupivacaine 0.5% produces an epidural block of similar onset, quality, and duration as the one produced by the same volume of 0.5% bupivacaine, with a motor block deeper than that produced by 0.5% ropivacaine. When prolonging the block for the first 12 hours after surgery with a patient-controlled epidural infusion, 0.125% levobupivacaine provides adequate pain relief after major orthopedic surgery, with similar recovery of motor function as compared with 0.125% bupivacaine and 0.2% ropivacaine.     

Pain relief by wound infiltration with bupivacaine or high-dose ropivacaine after inguinal hernia repair

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Wound infiltration with bupivacaine is often used for pain relief after inguinal hernia surgery. We hypothesized that the lower systemic toxicity of another long-acting local anesthetic of similar potency (ropivacaine) would make it possible to increase the dose to above that recommended for bupivacaine and thereby achieve more effective pain control. METHODS: Elective unilateral open hernia repair was performed on 144 patients at 4 hospitals. Surgery was performed under general anesthesia and, in a double-blind manner, the operating field was infiltrated with 40 mL ropivacaine 7.5 mg/mL (in = 73) or bupivacaine 2.5 mg/mL (n = 71 ) for postoperative pain relief. Pain at rest, on mobilization, and on coughing was assessed repeatedly during 24 hours using a visual analog scale. The patients' ability to walk and the need for supplementary analgesics were also recorded. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups with respect to pain scores, which the patients reported to be less than 15% (median) of the worst pain imaginable in all examinations performed at rest, or in the consumption of supplementary analgesics. Those who received ropivacaine could walk with no or only minor problems at an earlier stage than the bupivacaine patients (P < .03). Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Wound infiltration with long-acting local anesthetics resulted in low pain scores after hernia surgery. Bupivacaine 100 mg was as effective as ropivacaine 300 mg.     

Day-case endoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty versus open Lichtenstein hernioplasty for unilateral primary inguinal hernia in males

Background Endoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty (TEP) is an accepted technique for the repair of recurrent and bilateral inguinal hernia, but its role in the management of unilateral primary inguinal hernia remains controversial. The current randomized trial was undertaken to compare the postoperative and 1-year outcomes of day-case TEP and open Lichtenstein hernioplasty for unilateral primary inguinal hernia in males. Methods From January 2002 to January 2004, a total of 200 male patients were randomized to undergo either day-case unilateral TEP or open Lichtenstein hernioplasty under general anesthesia. The primary outcome measures included postoperative pain score, time until return to work, incidence of chronic groin pain, and recurrence rate 1 year after the operation. Results All TEP procedures were successfully performed without conversion. The mean operation time for TEP (50±13.2 min) was significantly shorter than for open Lichtenstein hernioplasty (58 ± 17.6 min) (p < 0.001). The pain score at rest was significantly lower in the TEP group than in the open group on postoperative days 0, 1, 4, 5, and 6. On the average, the patients returned to work 8.6 days after TEP and 14 days after Lichtenstein hernioplasty (p = 0.006). Postoperative recovery and morbidity rates were otherwise comparable between the two groups. The incidence of chronic groin pain 1 year after TEP (9.9%) was significantly lower than after open surgery (21.7%) (p = 0.032). None of the patients in either group showed recurrence at the last follow-up assessment. Conclusions Day-case TEP was superior to open Lichtenstein hernioplasty for the repair of unilateral primary inguinal hernia in males. The benefits of day-case TEP included less postoperative pain, a faster return to work, and a lower incidence of chronic groin pain.     

Effects of intrathecal fentanyl on quality of spinal anesthesia in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair

Background: The effect of intrathecal fentanyl on the characteristics of spinal anesthesia has not been investigated in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair. The purpose of this study was to assess whether the incidence and severity of pain during peritoneal sac traction is decreased by addition of fentanyl to bupivacaine in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair with spinal anesthesia. Methods: Children (6–14 years) were randomized into two groups. Group F (n = 25): hyperbaric bupivacaine plus 0.2 μg·kg⁻¹ of fentanyl. Group P (n = 25): hyperbaric bupivacaine plus 0.9% NaCl (placebo). The dose of bupivacaine was 0.4 mg·kg⁻¹. The primary variable was the incidence and severity of pain during peritoneal sac traction. Spinal block characteristics, duration of spinal anesthesia assessed by recovery of hip flexion and duration of analgesia were the secondary variables measured, and the side effects were noted. Results: There were significant differences in incidence of pain and pain scores during sac traction with lower incidence and scores in the fentanyl group (P = 0.009). Two groups were similar regarding the level of sensory block during sac traction and duration of spinal anesthesia. Duration of spinal analgesia was prolonged significantly in the fentanyl group (P = 0.025). Conclusion: Intrathecal fentanyl at a dose of 0.2 μg·kg⁻¹ added to bupivacaine significantly improves the quality of intraoperative analgesia and prolongs postoperative analgesia in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair with spinal anesthesia.     

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.