Search

Background: Thoracic epidural analgesia with bupivacaine resulted in clinically relevant postvoid residuals due to detrusor underactivity. This study aimed to compare the risk of bladder dysfunction with ropivacaine versus bupivacaine using postvoid residuals and maximum flow rates. Our hypothesis was that ropivacaine would result in lower postvoid residuals, because ropivacaine has been shown to have less effect on motor blockade., Methods: In this single-center, parallel-group, randomized, double-blind superiority trial, 42 patients undergoing open renal surgery were equally allocated to receive epidural bupivacaine 0.125% or ropivacaine 0.2%, and 36 were finally included. Inclusion criterion was normal bladder function. Patients underwent urodynamic investigations preoperatively and during thoracic epidural analgesia. Primary outcome was the difference in postvoid residual preoperatively and during thoracic epidural analgesia postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were changes in maximum flow rate between and within the groups., Results: Median difference in postvoid residual (ml) from baseline to postoperatively was 300 (range, 30 to 510; P < 0.001) for bupivacaine and 125 (range, -30 to 350; P = 0.011) for ropivacaine, with a significant mean difference between groups (-175; 95% CI, -295 to -40; P = 0.012). Median difference in maximum flow rate (ml/s) was more pronounced with bupivacaine (-12; range, -28 to 3; P < 0.001) than with ropivacaine (-4; range, -16 to 7; P = 0.025) with a significant mean difference between groups (7; 95% CI, 0 to 12; P = 0.028). Pain scores were similar. No adverse events occurred., Conclusions: Postvoid residuals were significantly lower using ropivacaine compared to bupivacaine for thoracic epidural analgesia reflecting less impairment of detrusor function with ropivacaine.

Background: Neosaxitoxin (NeoSTX) is a site-1 sodium channel blocker that produces prolonged local anesthesia in animals and humans. Under a Food and Drug Administration-approved phase 1 Investigational New Drug trial, the authors evaluated safety and efficacy of NeoSTX alone and combined with 0.2% bupivacaine (Bup) with and without epinephrine., Methods: The authors conducted a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial involving healthy male volunteers aged 18 to 35 yr receiving two 10-ml subcutaneous injections. Control sites received Bup. In part 1, active sites received (1) 5 to 40 μg NeoSTX+Saline (NeoSTX-Saline), (2) 5 to 40 μg NeoSTX+Bup (NeoSTX-Bup), or (3) placebo (Saline). In part 2, active sites received 10 or 30 μg NeoSTX+Bup+Epinephrine (NeoSTX-Bup-Epi) or placebo. Primary outcome measures were safety and adverse events associated with NeoSTX. Secondary outcomes included clinical biochemistry, NeoSTX pharmacokinetics, and cutaneous hypoesthesia., Results: A total of 84 subjects were randomized and completed the two-part trial with no serious adverse events or clinically significant physiologic impairments. Perioral numbness and tingling increased with NeoSTX dose for NeoSTX-Saline and NeoSTX-Bup. All symptoms resolved without intervention. NeoSTX-Bup-Epi dramatically reduced symptoms compared with other NeoSTX combinations (tingling: 0 vs. 70%, P = 0.004; numbness: 0 vs. 60%, P = 0.013) at the same dose. Mean peak plasma NeoSTX concentration for NeoSTX-Bup-Epi was reduced at least two-fold compared with NeoSTX-Saline and NeoSTX-Bup (67 ± 14, 134 ± 63, and 164 ± 81 pg/ml, respectively; P = 0.016). NeoSTX-Bup showed prolonged cutaneous block duration compared with Bup, NeoSTX-Saline, or placebo, at all doses. Median time to near-complete recovery for 10 μg NeoSTX-Bup-Epi was almost five-fold longer compared with Bup (50 vs. 10 h, P = 0.007)., Conclusion: NeoSTX combinations have a tolerable side effect profile and appear promising for prolonged local anesthesia.

Background: Previous studies in infant rats and case-control studies of human infants undergoing surgery have raised concerns about potential neurodevelopmental toxicities of general anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia is an alternative to general anesthesia for some infant surgeries. To test for potential toxicity, a spinal anesthesia model in infant rats was developed., Methods: Rats of postnatal ages 7, 14, and 21 days were assigned to no treatment, 1% isoflurane for either 1 h or 6 h, or lumbar spinal injection of saline or bupivacaine at doses of 3.75 mg/kg (low dose) or 7.5 mg/kg (high dose). Subgroups of animals underwent neurobehavioral testing and blood gas analysis. Brain and lumbar spinal cord sections were examined for apoptosis using cleaved caspase-3 immunostaining. The lumbar spinal cord was examined histologically.Rats exposed to spinal or general anesthesia as infants underwent Rotarod testing of motor performance as adults. Data were analyzed using ANOVA with general linear models, Friedman tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests, as appropriate., Results: Bupivacaine 3.75 mg/kg was effective for spinal anesthesia in all age groups. Impairments in sensory and motor function recovered in 40-60 min. Blood gases were similar among groups. Brain and spinal cord apoptosis increased in rats receiving 6 h of 1% isoflurane, but not among the other treatments. All groups showed intact motor performance at adulthood., Conclusions: Spinal anesthesia is technically feasible in infant rats and appears benign in terms of neuroapoptotic and neuromotor sequelae.

Background: It has been suggested that morbidly obese parturients may require less local anesthetic for spinal anesthesia. The aim of this study was to determine the effective dose (ED(50)/ED(95)) of intrathecal bupivacaine for cesarean delivery in morbidly obese patients., Methods: Morbidly obese parturients (body mass index equal to or more than 40) undergoing elective cesarean delivery were enrolled in this double-blinded study. Forty-two patients were randomly assigned to receive intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine in doses of 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, or 11 mg (n = 6 per group) coadministered with 200 μg morphine and 10 μg fentanyl. Success (induction) was defined as block height to pinprick equal to or more than T6 and success (operation) as success (induction) plus no requirement for epidural supplementation throughout surgery. The ED(50)/ED(95) values were determined using a logistic regression model., Results: ED(50) and ED(95) (with 95% confidence intervals) for success (operation) were 9.8 (8.6-11.0) and 15.0 (10.0-20.0), respectively, and were similar to corresponding values of a nonobese population determined previously using similar methodology. We were unable to measure ED(50)/ED(95) values for success (induction) because so few blocks failed initially, even at the low-dose range. There were no differences with regard to secondary outcomes (i.e., hypotension, vasopressor use, nausea, and vomiting)., Conclusions: Obese and nonobese patients undergoing cesarean delivery do not appear to respond differently to modest doses of intrathecal bupivacaine. This dose-response study suggests that doses of intrathecal bupivacaine less than 10 mg may not adequately ensure successful intraoperative anesthesia. Even when the initial block obtained with a low dose is satisfactory, it will not guarantee adequate anesthesia throughout surgery.

Thoracic epidural anesthesia is considered as an essential component of the perioperative care for patients undergoing lung resection. Although neurologic adverse events have been associated with this technique, permanent injury is rare. These events primarily involve the peripheral nervous system; for example, nerve root injury. We present a case of persistent cortical blindness after a test dose of bupivacaine was administered into an uneventfully placed thoracic epidural catheter.

Background: The current study was designed to test the hypothesis that high-dose dexmedetomidine added to local anesthetic would increase the duration of sensory and motor blockade in a rat model of sciatic nerve blockade without causing nerve damage., Methods: Thirty-one adult Sprague-Dawley rats received bilateral sciatic nerve blocks with either 0.2 ml bupivacaine, 0.5%, and 0.5% bupivacaine plus 0.005% dexmedetomidine in the contralateral extremity, or 0.2 ml dexmedetomidine, 0.005%, and normal saline in the contralateral extremity. Sensory and motor function were assessed by a blinded investigator every 30 min until the return of normal sensory and motor function. Sciatic nerves were harvested at either 24 h or 14 days after injection and analyzed for perineural inflammation and nerve damage., Results: High-dose dexmedetomidine added to bupivacaine significantly enhanced the duration of sensory and motor blockade. Dexmedetomidine alone did not cause significant motor or sensory block. All of the nerves analyzed had normal axons and myelin at 24 h and 14 days. Bupivacaine plus dexmedetomidine showed less perineural inflammation at 24 h than the bupivacaine group when compared with the saline control., Conclusion: The finding that high-dose dexmedetomidine can safely improve the duration of bupivacaine-induced antinociception after sciatic nerve blockade in rats is an essential first step encouraging future studies in humans. The dose of dexmedetomidine used in this study may exceed the sedative safety threshold in humans and could cause prolonged motor blockade; therefore, future work with clinically relevant doses is necessary.

Background: This double-blind, randomized study was aimed at detecting the effect of three different volumes of intrathecal levobupivacaine on the minimum local analgesic dose in early labor., Methods: Ninety-three nulliparous women requesting combined spinal-epidural analgesia, at more than 37 weeks gestation, with spontaneous onset of labor, cervical dilatation from 2 to 5 cm, were enrolled. Parturients received 10 ml (group 10), 5 ml (group 5), or 2.5 ml (group 2.5) of the spinal solution containing plain levobupivacaine diluted with 0.9% wt/vol saline to achieve the desired dose and volume at room temperature. A lumbar epidural catheter was then placed. The initial dose for each group was 2.0 mg, and the following doses were determined by the response of the previous patient using up-down sequential allocation. The authors required the test solution to achieve a visual analog pain score of 10 mm or less to be considered effective. The up-down sequences were analyzed using the Dixon and Massey formula and regression logistic model., Results: The minimum local analgesic dose of spinal levobupivacaine in spontaneously laboring women was 1.35 mg (95% confidence interval, 1.25-1.45 mg) in group 10, 1.63 mg (95% confidence interval, 1.51-1.76 mg) in group 5, and 1.97 mg (95% confidence interval, 1.89-2.05 mg) in group 2.5. A unit change in volume increased the odds of an effective response multiplicatively by a factor of 1.8., Conclusions: Analgesia can be achieved using lower doses and higher volumes even in subarachnoid space. The important role of the volume should be considered not only in epidural but also in spinal analgesia.

Background: The ideal intrathecal isobaric bupivacaine dose for cesarean delivery anesthesia is uncertain. While small doses (5-9 mg) of bupivacaine may reduce side effects such as hypotension, they potentially increase spinal anesthetic failures. This study determined the ED50 and ED95 of intrathecal isobaric bupivacaine (with adjuvant opioids) for cesarean delivery., Methods: After institutional review board approval and written informed consent were obtained, 48 parturients undergoing elective cesarean delivery under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging study. Patients received a 5-, 6-, 7-, 8-, 9-, 10-, 11-, or 12-mg intrathecal isobaric bupivacaine dose with 10 microg fentanyl and 200 microg morphine. Overall anesthetic success was recorded when no intraoperative epidural supplement was required during the cesarean delivery. ED50 and ED95 values for overall anesthetic success were determined using a logistic regression model., Results: ED50 and ED95 values for overall anesthetic success were 7.25 and 13.0 mg, respectively. No advantages for low doses could be demonstrated with regard to hypotension, nausea, vomiting, pruritus, or maternal satisfaction, although this study was underpowered to detect significant differences in secondary outcome variables., Conclusions: The ED50 and ED95 values (7.25 and 13.0 mg, respectively) for intrathecal isobaric bupivacaine in this circumstance are similar to values the authors determined recently for hyperbaric bupivacaine using similar methodology. These ED50 and ED95 values are significantly higher than those advocated in previous reports in which success was claimed using lower intrathecal bupivacaine doses. The current study used stricter criteria to define "successful" anesthesia and support the use of larger bupivacaine doses to ensure adequate patient comfort.

Background: The study was designed to determine and compare the median effective doses (MEDs) of intrathecal ropivacaine with levobupivacaine for labor analgesia., Methods: In this double-blind study, 100 parturients in early labor were randomized to receive either intrathecal ropivacaine or levobupivacaine. For each drug, the patients were assigned to receive one of the five doses studied, namely 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, or 3 mg. Effective analgesia was defined as a pain score (0-100 visual analog scale) of less than 10 within 15 min of injection, lasting for 45 min or more after the induction of analgesia. MEDs were derived from probit analysis. The duration of analgesia rendered by the two drugs at 2.5 and 3 mg was also compared., Results: The MED for levobupivacaine was 1.07 mg (95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.25 mg), and the MED for ropivacaine was 1.40 mg (95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.61 mg). Levobupivacaine was found to be 1.31 (95% confidence interval, 1.04-2.01) times more potent than ropivacaine. At doses of 2.5 mg or greater, there was no significant difference in duration of analgesia between levobupivacaine (median, 63.5 min; range, 46-123 min) and ropivacaine (median, 59.0 min; range, 47-93 min; P = 0.18). We detected no difference in the incidence of hypotension, nausea and vomiting, motor block, or abnormal fetal heart tracing between the two drugs., Conclusions: The MED of intrathecal ropivacaine for labor analgesia was significantly greater than levobupivacaine experimentally, but this significance was reduced when the comparison was based on molar potency. There was no difference in the duration of analgesia or adverse effects between the two drugs at higher doses (2.5 mg or greater).

Background: The authors developed and applied a method to optimize the combination of bupivacaine, fentanyl, and clonidine for continuous postoperative lumbar epidural analgesia., Methods: One hundred eighteen patients undergoing knee or hip surgery participated in the study. Postoperative epidural analgesia during 48 h after surgery was optimized under restrictions dictated by side effects. Initially, eight combinations of bupivacaine, fentanyl, and clonidine (expressed as drug concentration in the solution administered) were empirically chosen and investigated. To determine subsequent combinations, an optimization model was applied until three consecutive steps showed no decrease in pain score. For the first time in a clinical investigation, a regression model was applied when the optimization procedure led to combinations associated with unacceptable side effects., Results: The authors analyzed 12 combinations with an allowed bupivacaine concentration range of 0-2.5 mg/ml, a fentanyl concentration range of 0-5 microg/ml, and a clonidine concentration range of 0-5 microg/ml. The best combinations of bupivacaine, fentanyl, and clonidine concentrations were 1.0 mg/ml-1.4 microg/ml-0.5 microg/ml, 0.9 mg/ml-3.0 microg/ml-0.3 microg/ml, 0.6 mg/ml-2.5 microg/ml-0.8 microg/ml, and 1.0 mg/ml-2.4 microg/ml-1.0 microg/ml, respectively, all producing a similarly low pain score. The incidence of side effects was low. The application of the regression model to combinations associated with high incidence of motor block successfully directed the optimization procedure to combinations within the therapeutic range., Conclusions: The results support further study of the combinations of bupivacaine, fentanyl, and clonidine mentioned above for postoperative analgesia after knee and hip surgery. This novel optimization method may be useful in clinical research.

Background: Currently available local anesthetics have relatively brief durations of action. An ultralong-acting local anesthetic would benefit patients with acute and chronic pain. The authors prepared and characterized a novel liposomal bupivacaine formulation using remote loading of bupivacaine along an ammonium sulfate gradient and assessed its efficacy in humans., Methods: A large multivesicular liposomal bupivacaine formulation was prepared by subjecting small unilamellar vesicles to successive freeze-and-thaw cycles. Bupivacaine hydrochloride was then remotely loaded into the liposomes along an ammonium sulfate gradient ([(NH4)2SO4)]intraliposome/[(NH4)2SO4)]medium > 1000). The liposomes were then characterized for size distribution; drug-to-phospholipid ratio; in vitro release profile at 4 degree, 21 degree C, and 37 degree C; sterility; and pyrogenicity. Six subjects each received six intradermal injections in the lower back with 0.5 ml of 0.5, 1.0, and 2% liposomal bupivacaine; 0.5% standard bupivacaine; saline; and "empty" liposomes. Duration of analgesia was assessed using pinprick testing of the skin directly over the injection sites. Results were compared using the log-rank test., Results: The mean large multivesicular vesicle size was 2439 +/- 544 nm, with a drug-to-phospholipid ratio of 1.8, fivefold greater than results previously reported. In vitro release was slowest at 4 degree C. The median duration of analgesia with 0.5% standard bupivacaine was 1 h. The median durations of analgesia after 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0% liposomal bupivacaine were 19, 38, and 48 h, respectively. Neither saline nor "empty" liposomes produced analgesia., Conclusions: This novel liposomal formulation had a favorable drug-to-phospholipid ratio and prolonged the duration of bupivacaine analgesia in a dose-dependent manner. If these results in healthy volunteers can be duplicated in the clinical setting, this formulation has the potential to significantly impact the management of pain.

Background: The antidepressant amitriptyline is used as an adjuvant in the treatment of chronic pain conditions. Among its many actions, this drug also blocks ion channels, such as Na channels. Preliminary animal studies suggested that amitripty-line would be a longer-lasting local anesthetic than bupivacaine, with potentially fewer side effects. Therefore, the authors investigated the adverse effects and effectiveness of this drug when given for ulnar nerve blockade in human volunteers., Methods: After obtaining written institutional review board approval and informed consent, a typical phase Ia trial was conducted by administration to the ulnar nerve at the level of the wrist in an open-label, dose-escalating fashion. Amitripty-line hydrochloride, 4 ml, at concentrations of 5, 10, and 20 mM (n = 4-9/group) was used for each volunteer. If no major side effects and nerve block were encountered, comparison in a randomized, double-blinded trial of amitriptyline (20 mM) to placebo and bupivacaine (4 mM) (n = 4-9/group), was to follow. A blunt needle was used to grade the pain, and motor blockade was assessed by the Froment test., Results: There was no significant statistical difference in terms of side effects (pain, swelling, erythema, and sedation) among any groups. The analgesic effects of 20 mM amitriptyline and 4 mm bupivacaine solution were significantly higher than those of the placebo solution., Conclusions: Because of the lack of evidence that amitripty-line provides better nerve blockade than current local anesthetics and the potential for neurotoxicity, its use for peripheral nerve blockade in humans seems limited.

Background: Lower systemic toxicity reported with ropivacaine and levobupivacaine may produce less reliable recognition of inadvertent intravenous injection during regional anesthesia. This study was undertaken to determine whether ropivacaine and levobupivacaine are suitable for use as intravenous test doses by evaluating central nervous system (CNS) symptoms after intravenous bolus injection., Methods: Institutional approval and informed consent were granted for the study. One hundred twenty patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery were randomly assigned to receive 5 ml intravenous saline, 100 mg lidocaine, 25 mg ropivacaine, or 25 mg levobupivacaine before anesthesia. Patients reported CNS symptoms after injection and were monitored for hemodynamic change., Results: Intravenous ropivacaine or levobupivacaine produced CNS symptoms in only 52% and 57% of patients, respectively, compared with 87% of patients after lidocaine (P < 0.02). Despite preparatory instruction, many patients receiving ropivacaine or levobupivacaine did not spontaneously volunteer symptoms because they were subtle and admitted symptoms only after in-depth questioning by the investigator., Conclusions: Plain ropivacaine and levobupivacaine (25 mg) solutions are unsuitable for use as intravenous test doses during regional anesthesia because CNS symptoms are insufficient. When using ropivacaine or levobupivacaine for regional anesthesia, for test dose purposes, the authors recommend the addition of epinephrine to the local anesthetic solution or the use of a separate agent with more predictable CNS characteristics.

Background: Successful cesarean delivery anesthesia has been reported with use of small doses (5-9 mg) of intrathecal bupivacaine coadministered with opioids. This double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging study determined the ED50 and ED95 of intrathecal bupivacaine (with adjuvant opioids) for cesarean delivery anesthesia., Methods: Forty-two parturients undergoing elective cesarean delivery with use of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia received intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine in doses of 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, or 12 mg in equal volumes with an added 10 microg intrathecal fentanyl and 200 microg intrathecal morphine. Sensory levels (pinprick) were evaluated every 2 min until a T6 level was achieved. The dose was a success(induction) if a bilateral T6 block occurred in 10 min; otherwise, it was a failure(induction). In addition to being a success(induction), the dose was a success(operation) if no intraoperative epidural supplement was required; otherwise, it was a failure(operation). ED50 and ED95 for both success(induction) and success(operation) were determined with use of a logistic regression model., Results: ED50 for success(induction) and success(operation) were 6.7 and 7.6 mg, respectively, whereas the ED95 for success(induction) and success(operation) were 11.0 and 11.2 mg. Speed of onset correlated inversely with dose. Although no clear advantage for low doses could be demonstrated (hypotension, nausea, vomiting, pruritus, or maternal satisfaction), this study was underpowered to detect significance in these variables., Conclusions: The ED95 of intrathecal bupivacaine under the conditions of this study is considerably in excess of the low doses proposed for cesarean delivery in some recent publications. When doses of intrathecal bupivacaine less than the ED95, particularly near the ED50, are used, the doses should be administered as part of a catheter-based technique.

Background: Levobupivacaine, the levo-enantiomer of bupivacaine, is as potent as bupivacaine but less toxic. Therefore, the authors investigated the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of perioperative epidural levobupivacaine with and without fentanyl in children., Methods: After Research Ethics Board approval and informed written consent, 120 healthy children aged 6 months to 12 yr who were scheduled to undergo urologic or abdominal surgery were randomized in a double-blinded and concealed manner to receive one of four epidural solutions as a continuous infusion for 24 h: 0.125% levobupivacaine; 0.0625% levobupivacaine; 1 mug/ml fentanyl; or the combination, 0.0625 levobupivacaine and 1 mug/ml fentanyl. After induction of anesthesia and tracheal intubation, a lumbar epidural catheter was sited, a loading dose was administered (0.75 ml/kg levobupivacaine, 0.175%), and the epidural infusion was commenced. The primary endpoint was the need for rescue analgesia (morphine) in the first 10 h after surgery. Pain, motor strength, and side effects were recorded for 24 h. Venous blood was collected from 18 children to determine the plasma concentrations of levobupivacaine and/or fentanyl before and 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, and 26 or 30 h after the start of the epidural infusion., Results: Of the 114 children who were analyzed for intention to treat, a similar number of children in each group reached the 10-h mark. The time to the first dose of morphine in the first 10 h was less in the plain fentanyl group (P < 0.044). All other effects were similar among the four groups. The plasma concentration of levobupivacaine increased during the infusion period, reaching a maximum of 0.76 +/- 0.11 mug/ml in the 0.125% group and 0.48 +/- 0.12 mug/ml in the 0.0625% group by 24 h. The plasma concentration of fentanyl also increased steadily, reaching a maximum concentration of 0.37 +/- 0.11 ng/ml by 24 h., Conclusion: We conclude that 0.0625% levobupivacaine without fentanyl is an effective perioperative epidural solution in children when infused at a rate of 0.3 ml. kg-1. h-1. The plasma concentrations of 0.125% and 0.0625% levobupivacaine and fentanyl (1 mug/ml) at the end of a 24-h infusion are low.

Background: The aim of this randomized, double-blinded study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of bupivacaine versus ropivacaine brachial plexus analgesia after ambulatory hand surgery. An additional aim was to study the feasibility and safety of patient-controlled regional analgesia (PCRA) outside the hospital., Methods: Sixty patients scheduled for ambulatory hand surgery underwent surgery with axillary plexus blockade. After surgery, the plexus catheter was connected to an elastomeric, disposable "homepump," containing 100 ml of either 0.125% bupivacaine or 0.125% ropivacaine. When patients experienced pain, they self-administered 10 ml of the study drug. Analgesic efficacy of PCRA was evaluated by self-assessment of pain intensity by visual analog scale (VAS) and verbal scale. Patients recorded adverse effects, technical problems, use of rescue analgesic tablets, and overall satisfaction. A follow-up telephone call was made the day after surgery., Results: Visual analog scale scores decreased after each treatment in both groups, but there were no significant differences between the two drugs. One patient in each group took rescue dextropropoxyphene tablets. In both groups, 87% patients expressed their desire to have the same treatment again. On the day of surgery, significantly more patients were satisfied with ropivacaine PCRA. None of the patients had any signs or symptoms of local anesthetic toxicity or catheter infection., Conclusions: This double-blinded study has demonstrated the feasibility of self-administration of local anesthetic to manage postoperative pain outside the hospital. Ropivacaine and bupivacaine provided effective analgesia, and patient satisfaction with PCRA was high. Patient selection, follow-up telephone call, and 24-h access to anesthesiology services are prerequisites for PCRA at home.

Background: Because general anesthesia with tracheal intubation can elicit life-threatening bronchospasm in patients with bronchial hyperreactivity, epidural anesthesia is often preferred. However, segmental high thoracic epidural anesthesia (sTEA) causes pulmonary sympathetic and respiratory motor blockade. Whether it can be safely used for chest wall surgery as a primary anesthetic technique in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma is unclear. Furthermore, ropivacaine supposedly evokes less motor blockade than bupivacaine and might minimize side effects. To test the feasibility of the technique and the hypotheses that (1) sTEA with ropivacaine or bupivacaine does not change lung function and (2) there is no difference between sTEA with ropivacaine or bupivacaine, the authors studied 20 patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] = 52.1 +/- 17.3% of predicted [mean +/- SD]) or asthma who were undergoing breast surgery., Methods: In a double-blind, randomized fashion, sTEA was performed with 6.6 +/- 0.5 ml of either ropivacaine, 0.75% (n = 10), or bupivacaine, 0.75% (n = 10). FEV1, vital capacity, FEV1 over vital capacity, spread of analgesia (pin prick), hand and foot skin temperatures, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, and local anesthetic plasma concentrations were measured with patients in the sitting and supine positions before and during sTEA., Results: Segmental high thoracic epidural anesthesia (segmental spread C4-T8 [bupivacaine] and C5-T9 [ropivacaine]) significantly decreased FEV1 from 1.22 +/- 0.54 l (supine) to 1.09 +/- 0.56 l (ropivacaine) and from 1.23 +/- 0.49 l to 1.12 +/- 0.46 l (bupivacaine). In contrast, FEV1 over vital capacity increased from 64.6 +/- 13.5 to 68.2 +/- 14.5% (ropivacaine) and from 62.8 +/- 12.4 to 66.5 +/- 13.6% (bupivacaine). There was no difference between ropivacaine and bupivacaine. Skin temperatures increased significantly, whereas arterial pressure and heart rate significantly decreased indicating widespread sympathetic blockade. All 20 patients tolerated surgery well., Conclusions: Despite sympathetic blockade, sTEA does not increase airway obstruction and evokes only a small decrease in FEV1 as a sign of mild respiratory motor blockade with no difference between ropivacaine and bupivacaine. Therefore, sTEA can be used in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma undergoing chest wall surgery as an alternative technique to general anesthesia.

Background: Combining bupivacaine with fentanyl for intrathecal analgesia in labor is well recognized, but dosages commonly used are arbitrarily chosen and may be excessive. This study aimed to determine the median effective dose (ED50) of intrathecal bupivacaine, defined as the minimum local analgesic dose (MLAD), and then use this to assess the effect of different doses of fentanyl., Methods: In this double-blind, randomized, prospective study, 124 parturients receiving combined spinal epidural analgesia at 2-6-cm cervical dilatation were allocated to one of four groups to receive bupivacaine alone or with 5, 15, or 25 microg fentanyl, using the technique of up-down sequential allocation. Analgesic effectiveness was assessed using 100-mm visual analog pain scores, with less than or equal to 10 mm within 15 min defined as effective. MLAD was calculated using the formula of Dixon and Massey. Pruritus and duration of spinal analgesia were also recorded., Results: Minimum local analgesic dose of intrathecal bupivacaine was 1.99 mg (95% confidence interval, 1.71, 2.27). There were similar significant reductions in MLAD (P < 0.001) for all bupivacaine-fentanyl groups compared with bupivacaine control. There was a dose-dependent increase in both pruritus and duration of spinal analgesia with increasing fentanyl (P < 0.0001)., Conclusion: Under the conditions of this study, the addition of intrathecal fentanyl 5 microg offers a similar significant bupivacaine dose-sparing effect as 15 and 25 microg. Analgesia in the first stage of labor can be achieved using lower doses of fentanyl, resulting in less pruritus but with a shortening of duration of action.

Background: This study compared the administration of 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil with that of 0.1% bupivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil via patient-controlled epidural analgesia route during labor., Methods: Two hundred healthy pregnant women at term with a single fetus with a vertex fetal presentation were randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive either 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil or 0.1% bupivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil using a patient-controlled epidural analgesia pump (5-ml bolus dose, 10-min locked-out period, no basal infusion). Pain score on a visual analog scale, Bromage score (0-3), level of sensory block, patient-controlled epidural analgesia ratio, drug use, supplemental boluses, and side effects were recorded at 30 min and then hourly. Mode of delivery, duration of first and second stages of labor, umbilical cord pH, Apgar scores of the newborn, and a measure of maternal satisfaction were recorded after delivery., Results: No differences were seen between the two groups for pain scores on a visual analog scale during labor, volume of anesthetic solution used, mode of delivery, or side effects. Motor block during the first stage of labor was significantly less in the ropivacaine group than in the bupivacaine group (no motor block in 97.8 of patients vs. 88.3%, respectively; P < 0.01). Duration of the second stage of labor was shorter in the ropivacaine group (1.3 +/- 1.0 vs. 1.5 +/- 1.2 h [mean +/- SD]; P < 0.05). Maternal satisfaction was greater in the bupivacaine group (91 +/- 13 mm for contraction, 89 +/- 19 mm for delivery on a visual scale: 0 = not satisfied at all, 100 = fully satisfied) than in the ropivacaine group (84 +/- 21 and 80 +/- 25 mm; P < 0.0001). Patients in the ropivacaine group requested more supplemental boluses to achieve analgesia during the second stage of labor than those in the bupivacaine group (29.7 vs. 19.8%, respectively, requested one or more supplemental boluses; P < 0.05)., Conclusions: Delivered as patient-controlled epidural analgesia, 0.1% ropivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil produce less motor block but are clinically less potent than 0.1% bupivacaine and 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil.

Background: Regional analgesia for labor often is initiated with an intrathecal injection of a local anesthetic and opioid. The purpose of this prospective, randomized, blinded study was to determine the optimal dose of intrathecal sufentanil when combined with 2.5 mg bupivacaine for labor analgesia., Methods: One hundred seventy parous parturients with cervical dilation between 3-5 cm were randomized to receive intrathecal 0 (control), 2.5, 5.0, 7.5, or 10.0 microg sufentanil combined with 2.5 mg bupivacaine, followed by a lidocaine epidural test dose, for initiation of analgesia (34 patients in each group). Visual analog scores and the presence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus were determined every 15 min until the patient requested additional analgesia. Fetal heart rate tracings were compared between groups., Results: Groups were similar for age, height, weight, oxytocin dose, duration of labor, and baseline visual analog scores. Duration of action was significantly shorter for control patients (39 +/- 25 min [mean +/- SD]) compared with those administered sufentanil, all doses (93 +/- 32, 93 +/- 47, 94 +/- 33, 97 +/- 39 min), but was not different among groups administered 2.5, 5.0, 7.5, or 10.0 microg sufentanil. More patients who received 10 microg sufentanil reported nausea and vomiting than did control patients. The severity of pruritus increased with administration of 7.5 and 10.0 microg sufentanil. There was no difference in fetal heart rate changes among groups., Conclusions: Intrathecal bupivacaine (2.5 mg) without sufentanil did not provide satisfactory analgesia for parous patients. However, bupivacaine combined with 2.5 microg sufentanil provided analgesia comparable to higher doses, with a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting and less severe pruritus.

Background: The authors applied an optimization model (direct search) to find the optimal combination of bupivacaine dose, fentanyl dose, clonidine dose, and infusion rate for continuous postoperative epidural analgesia., Methods: One hundred ninety patients undergoing 48-h thoracic epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery were studied. Combinations of the variables of bupivacaine dose, fentanyl dose, clonidine dose, and infusion rate were investigated to optimize the analgesic effect (monitored by verbal descriptor pain score) under restrictions dictated by the incidence and severity of side effects. Six combinations were empirically chosen and investigated. Then a stepwise optimization model was applied to determine subsequent combinations until no decrease in the pain score after three consecutive steps was obtained., Results: Twenty combinations were analyzed. The optimization procedure led to a reduction in the incidence of side effects and in the mean pain scores. The three best combinations of bupivacaine dose (mg/h), fentanyl dose (microg/h), clonidine dose (microg/h), and infusion rate (ml/h) were: 9-21-5-7, 8-30-0-9, and 13-25-0-9, respectively., Conclusions: Given the variables investigated, the aforementioned combinations may be the optimal ones to provide postoperative analgesia after major abdominal surgery. Using the direct search method, the enormous number of possible combinations of a therapeutic strategy can be reduced to a small number of potentially useful ones. This is accomplished using a scientific rather than an arbitrary procedure.

Background: Intrathecal (IT) opioid and local anesthetic combinations are popular for labor analgesia because of rapid, effective pain relief, but the duration of analgesia is limited. This study was undertaken to determine whether the addition of clonidine and neostigmine to IT bupivacaine-fentanyl would increase the duration of analgesia without increasing side effects for patients in labor., Methods: Forty-five healthy parturients in active labor were randomized to receive a 2-ml IT dose of one of the following dextrose-containing solutions using the combined spinal-epidural technique: (1) bupivacaine 2.5 mg and fentanyl 25 microg (BF); (2) BF plus clonidine 30 microg (BFC); or (3) BFC plus neostigmine 10 microg (BFCN). Pain, sensory levels, motor block, side effects, maternal vital signs, and fetal heart rate were systematically assessed., Results: Patients administered BFCN had significantly longer analgesia (165+/-32 min) than those who received BF (90+/-21 min; P<0.001) or BFC (123+/-21 min; P<0.001). Pain scores, block characteristics, maternal vital signs, Apgar scores, maternal satisfaction, and side effects were similar among groups except for nausea, which was significantly greater in the BFCN group (P<0.05 as compared with BFC)., Conclusions: The addition of clonidine and neostigmine significantly increased the duration of analgesia from IT bupivacaine-fentanyl during labor, but neostigmine caused more nausea. Although serious side effects were not observed in this study, safety must be further addressed before the routine use of multiple IT drugs is advocated.

Background: Spinal anesthesia for surgical repair of hip fracture in the elderly is associated with a high incidence of hypotension. The synergism between intrathecal opioids and local anesthetics may make it possible to achieve reliable spinal anesthesia with minimal hypotension using a minidose of local anesthetic., Methods: Twenty patients aged > or = 70 yr undergoing surgical repair of hip fracture were randomized into two groups of 10 patients each. Group A received a spinal anesthetic of bupivacaine 4 mg plus fentanyl 20 microg, and group B received 10 mg bupivacaine. Hypotension was defined as a systolic pressure of < 90 mmHg or a 25% decrease in mean arterial pressure from baseline. Hypotension was treated with intravenous ephedrine boluses 5-10 mg up to a maximum 50 mg, and thereafter by phenylephrine boluses of 100-200 microg., Results: All patients had satisfactory anesthesia. One of 10 patients in group A required ephedrine, a single dose of 5 mg. Nine of 10 patients in group B required vasopressor support of blood pressure. Group B patients required an average of 35 mg ephedrine, and two patients required phenylephrine. The lowest recorded systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressures as fractions of the baseline pressures were, respectively, 81%, 84%, and 85% versus 64%, 69%, and 64% for group A versus group B., Conclusions: A "minidose" of 4 mg bupivacaine in combination with 20 microg fentanyl provides spinal anesthesia for surgical repair of hip fracture in the elderly. The minidose combination caused dramatically less hypotension than 10 mg bupivacaine and nearly eliminated the need for vasopressor support of blood pressure.

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 < or = 0.053). No significant difference in observed maximum concentration of drug after dosing or area under the plasma drug concentration versus time curve were seen. The maximum concentrations were 1.017 and 1.053 microg/ml, and the areas were 4.082 and 3.765 h(microg/ml) for the levobupivacaine and bupivacaine groups, respectively. Umbilical vein-to-maternal vein ratios were 0.303 for the levobupivacaine group and 0.254 for the bupivacaine group., Conclusions: The use of epidural 0.5% levobupivacaine for cesarean delivery results in equally efficacious anesthesia compared with 0.5% bupivacaine. Pharmacokinetic parameters were similar in the two groups.

Background: The rationale of this study was to compare high-dose epidural clonidine with a more commonly used agent, such as bupivacaine. This was performed to give a more objective idea of the relative analgesic potency of epidural clonidine., Methods: Sixty patients undergoing intestinal surgery during propofol anesthesia were studied. At induction, the patients received epidurally a dose of 10 micrograms/kg [corrected] clonidine in 7 ml saline followed by an infusion of 6 micrograms [corrected] x kg(-1) x h(-1) (7 ml/h) (group 1, n = 20), a dose of 7 ml bupivacaine, 0.5%, followed by 7 ml/h bupivacaine, 0.25% (group 2, n = 20), or a dose of 7 ml bupivacaine, 0.25%, followed by 7 ml/h bupivacaine, 0.125% (group 3, n = 20). Intraoperatively, increases in arterial blood pressure or heart rate not responding to propofol (0.5 mg/kg) were treated with intravenous alfentanil (0.05 mg/kg). Additional doses of propofol were given to maintain an adequate bispectral index. The epidural infusions were maintained for 12 h. In cases of subjective visual analogue pain scores up to 5 cm at rest or up to 8 cm during coughing, the patients were given access to a patient-controlled analgesia device., Results: During anesthesia, patients in group 1 required less propofol than those in groups 2 and 3 (78 [36-142] mg vs. 229 [184-252] mg and 362 [295-458] mg; P < 0.05) and less alfentanil than patients in group 3 (0 [0-0] mg vs. 11 [6-20] mg; P < 0.05). Analgesia lasted 380 min (range, 180-645 min) in group 1 versus 30 min (range, 25-40 min) in group 2 and 22 min (range, 12.5-42 min) in group 3 (P < 0.05). There was no suggestion of a hemodynamic difference among the three groups except for heart rates that were significantly reduced in patients in group 1. Sedation scores were significantly higher in this group during the first 2 h postoperatively., Conclusion: Our results show that high doses of epidural clonidine potentiate general anesthetics and provide more efficient postoperative analgesia than the two bupivacaine dosage regimens investigated.

Background: The minimum local analgesic concentration (MLAC) has been defined as the median effective local analgesic concentration in a 20-ml volume for epidural analgesia in the first stage of labor. The aim of this study was to assess the relative analgesic potencies of epidural bupivacaine and ropivacaine by determining their respective minimum local analgesic concentrations., Methods: Seventy-three parturients at < or = 7 cm cervical dilation who requested epidural analgesia were allocated to one of two groups in this double-blinded, randomized, prospective study. After a lumbar epidural catheter was placed, 20 ml of the test solution was given, either ropivacaine (n = 34) or bupivacaine (n = 39). The concentration of local anesthetic was determined by the response of the previous patient in that group to a higher or lower concentration using up-down sequential allocation. Analgesic efficacy was assessed using 100-mm visual analog pain scores with < or = 10 mm within 30 min defined as effective. An effective result directed a 0.01% wt/vol decrement for the next patient. An ineffective result directed a 0.01% wt/vol increment., Results: The minimum local analgesic concentration of ropivacaine was 0.111% wt/vol (95% confidence interval, 0.100-0.122), and the minimum local analgesic concentration of bupivacaine was 0.067% wt/vol (95% confidence interval, 0.052-0.082). Ropivacaine was significantly less potent than bupivacaine, with a potency ratio of 0.6 (95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.74). No difference in motor effects was observed., Conclusion: Ropivacaine was significantly less potent than bupivacaine for epidural analgesia in the first stage of labor.

Background: Ropivacaine is a newly introduced local anesthetic that may be a useful alternative to low-dose bupivacaine for outpatient spinal anesthesia. However, its relative potency to bupivacaine and its dose-response characteristics are unknown. This double-blind, randomized, crossover study was designed to determine relative potencies of low-dose hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine and bupivacaine and to assess the suitability of spinal ropivacaine for outpatient anesthesia., Methods: Eighteen healthy volunteers were randomized into three equal groups to receive one spinal administration with bupivacaine and a second with ropivacaine, of equal-milligram doses (4, 8, or 12 mg) of 0.25% drug with 5% dextrose. The duration of blockade was assessed with (1) pinprick, (2) transcutaneous electrical stimulation, (3) tolerance to high tourniquet, (4) electromyography and isometric force dynamometry, and (5) achievement of discharge criteria. Differences between ropivacaine and bupivacaine were assessed with linear and multiple regression. P < 0.05 was considered significant., Results: Ropivacaine and bupivacaine provided dose-dependent prolongation of sensory and motor block and time until achievement of discharge criteria (R2 ranges from 0.33-0.99; P values from < 0.001 through 0.01). Spinal anesthesia with ropivacaine was significantly different from bupivacaine and was approximately half as potent for all criteria studied. A high incidence of back pain (28%; P = 0.098) was noted after intrathecal ropivacaine was given., Conclusion: Ropivacaine is half as potent and in equipotent doses has a similar profile to bupivacaine with a higher incidence of side effects. Low-dose hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine does not appear to offer an advantage over bupivacaine for use in outpatient anesthesia.

Background: The authors studied the addition of bupivacaine and epinephrine, separately and together, to epidural fentanyl to determine whether this improved postcesarean analgesia and reduced the incidence of side effects., Methods: After elective cesarean section, 100 parturient patients who received fentanyl (3 microg/ml) epidurally for 48 h were allocated randomly in a double-blinded manner to four groups to receive, in addition to the study solution, 0.01% bupivacaine, 0.5 microg/ml epinephrine, both, or neither. A neurologic assessment of breast-fed neonates was made at 2 and 48 h of life. Plasma fentanyl concentrations were determined in a subset of patients at intervals after treatment., Results: Patients receiving fentanyl alone made more attempts at patient-controlled analgesia (P < 0.01), required a greater total dose of fentanyl (P < 0.01), reported more pain (P < 0.003) and less satisfaction (P < 0.003), and had more nausea and urinary retention (P < 0.05) than all other groups. Patients who received bupivacaine with or without epinephrine had better overall satisfaction scores than those who did not receive bupivacaine (P < 0.001), and they required less fentanyl (P < 0.02) than patients who received fentanyl with only epinephrine. Motor blockade or orthostatic hypotension did not develop in any patient, and all patients could ambulate without difficulty. Neurobehavioral scores, which were similar among all neonates, were within the normal range. Plasma concentrations of fentanyl increased after epinephrine-containing solutions were discontinued., Conclusions: During the conditions of this study, the addition of epinephrine and bupivacaine to a 3-microg/ml epidural fentanyl solution for postcesarean section pain relief provided superior analgesia compared with fentanyl alone or fentanyl with epinephrine. Whether increasing the concentration of fentanyl alone might improve the efficacy of fentanyl remains unclear.

Background: Recent evidence suggests that transient neurologic symptoms commonly follow lidocaine spinal anesthesia. However, information concerning factors that affect their occurrence is limited. Accordingly, to evaluate many potential risk factors, the authors undertook a prospective, multicenter, epidemiologic study., Methods: On a voluntary basis, anesthetists at 15 participating centers forwarded a data sheet on patients who had spinal anesthesia to a research nurse blinded to the details of anesthesia and surgery. A subset was randomly selected for follow-up. The pressure [corrected] of transient neurologic symptoms, defined as leg or buttock pain, was the principal outcome variable. Logistic regression was used to control for potential confounders, and adjusted odds ratios and confidence intervals were used to estimate relative risk., Results: During a 14-month period, 1,863 patients were studied, of whom 47% received lidocaine, 40% bupivacaine, and 13% tetracaine. Patients given lidocaine were at higher risk for symptoms compared with those receiving bupivacaine (relative risk, 5.1; 95% CI, 2.5 to 10.2) or tetracaine (relative risk, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.04 to 9.84). For patients who received lidocaine, the relative risk of transient neurologic symptoms was 2.6 (95% CI, 1.5 to 4.5) with the lithotomy position compared with other positions, 3.6 (95% CI, 1.9 to 6.8), for outpatients compared with inpatients, and 1.6 (95% CI, 1 to 2.5) for obese (body mass index >30) compared with nonobese patients., Conclusions: These results indicate that transient neurologic symptoms commonly follow lidocaine spinal anesthesia but are relatively uncommon with bupivacaine or tetracaine. The data identify lithotomy position and outpatient status as important risk factors in patients who receive lidocaine. Among other factors postulated to increase risk, obesity had an effect of borderline statistical significance, whereas age, sex, history of back pain, needle type, and lidocaine dose and concentration failed to affect risk.

Background: Many cases of cauda equina syndrome after maldistribution of local anesthetics during continuous spinal anesthesia have been reported. In experiments, a caudad route of catheter travel and the use of hyperbaric agents have been shown to induce these limited blocks. The aim of this clinical study was to verify this hypothesis and seek a predictive factor for the maldistribution of bupivacaine., Method: Continuous spinal anesthesia via a 19-gauge end port spinal catheter was performed in 80 elderly patients randomly assigned to receive either isobaric or hyperbaric solutions. Successive injections of 2.5 mg bupivacaine were performed at 5-min intervals until a sensory level at or cranial to T8 was obtained. Maldistribution was defined by a sensory level caudal to T12 despite a total dose of 17.5 mg of either isobaric or hyperbaric bupivacaine. After surgery, all catheters were injected with contrast media and examined radiographically., Results: The frequency of maldistribution was not significantly different in the isobaric and hyperbaric groups. A caudally oriented catheter tip was found to be a major cause of maldistribution (P < 10(-5)). A thoracic sensory level could be reached in all patients presenting a limited block by simply changing the baricity of the bupivacaine, the position of the patient, or both. The sensory level obtained 10 min after the first injection of 2.5 mg isobaric or hyperbaric bupivacaine was found to be a predictive factor of maldistribution., Conclusions: Hyperbaric solutions do not appear to be a clinical factor in the development of limited block. The principle factor causing the maldistribution of bupivacaine is the caudal orientation of the tip of the end-hole catheter rather than its level or the route of catheter travel.