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

Paediatric Anaesthesia

Volumn 16, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 955-961

  Ingelmo, Pablo M ^a,b   Locatelli, Bruno G ^a   Sonzogni, Valter ^a   Gattoni, Chiara ^a   Cadisco, Alberto ^a   Lorini, Monia ^a   Sora, Gloria N ^a   Fumagalli, Roberto ^a,b  

^a OSPEDALI RIUNITI   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MILANO BICOCCA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Bupivacaine; Children; Levobupivacaine; Propofol; Ropivacaine

Indexed keywords

BUPIVACAINE; INTRAVENOUS ANESTHETIC AGENT; LEVOBUPIVACAINE; PROPOFOL; ROPIVACAINE;

ANALGESIA; ANALGESIC ACTIVITY; ARTICLE; CAUDAL ANESTHESIA; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG EFFICACY; FEMALE; HERNIOPLASTY; HUMAN; INGUINAL HERNIA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; ORCHIDOPEXY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PEDIATRIC SURGERY; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

AMIDES; ANESTHESIA; BUPIVACAINE; CAUDA EQUINA; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT; MALE; MOTOR ACTIVITY;

EID: 33745246285     PISSN: 11555645     EISSN: 14609592     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2006.01903.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Polley LS, Columb MO, Naughton NN et al. Relative analgesic potencies of ropivacaine and bupivacaine for epidural analgesia in labor: implications for therapeutic indexes. Anesthesiology 1999; 90: 944-950.
2. Breschan C, Jost R, Krumpholz R et al. A prospective study comparing the analgesic efficacy of levobupivacaine, ropivacaine and bupivacaine in pediatric patients undergoing caudal blockade. Pediatr Anesth 2005; 15: 301-306.
3. Ivani G, De Negri P, Lonnqvist PA et al. Caudal anaesthesia for minor pediatric surgery: a prospective randomized comparison of ropivacaine 0.2% vs levobupivacaine 0.2%. Pediatr Anesth 2005; 15: 491-494.
4. Ivani G, De Negri P, Conio A et al. Comparison o racemic bupivacaine, ropivacaine and levo-bupivacaine for pediatric caudal anesthesia: effects on postoperative analgesia and motor block. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2002; 27: 157-161.
5. Ivani G, Lampugnani E, Torre G et al. Comparison of ropivacaine and bupivacaine for paediatric caudal block. Br J Anaesth 1998; 81: 247-248.
6. Ivani G, Mereto N, Lampugnani E et al. Ropivacaine in paediatric surgery: preliminary results. Paediatr Anaesth 1998; 8: 127-129.
7. Ivani G. Ropivacaine: is it time for children? Paediatr Anaesth 2002; 12: 383-387.
8. Antognini J, Cartens E. In vivo characterization of clinical anaesthesia and its components. Br J Anaesth 2002; 89: 156-166.
9. Zhou HH, Jin TT, Qin B et al. Suppression of spinal cord motoneuron excitability correlates with surgical immobility during isofluorane anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1998; 88: 955-961.
10. Aldrete JA, Kroulik D. A postanesthetic recovery score. Anesth Analg 1970; 49: 924-934.
11. Antognoni JF, Carstens E. A simple, quantifiable and accurate method for applying a noxious mechanical stimulus. Anesth Analg 1998; 87: 1446-1449.
12. Locatelli BG, Ingelmo PM, Sonzogni V et al. Randomized, double blind, phase III controlled trial comparing levobupivacaine 0.25%, ropivacaine 0.25% and bupivacaine 0.25% by caudal route in children. Br J Anaesth 2005; 94: 366-371.
13. Buttner W, Finke W. Analysis of behavioural and physiological parameters for the assessment of postoperative analgesic demand in newborns, infants and young children: a comprehensive report on seven consecutive studies. Paediatr Anaesth 2000; 10: 303-318.
14. Rampil IJ. Anesthetic potency is not altered after hypotermic spinal cord transaction in rats. Anesthesiology 1994; 80: 606-610.
15. Rampil IJ, King BS. Volatile anesthetics depress spinal motor neurons. Anesthesiology 1996; 85: 129-134.
16. Jinks Sl, Antognoni JF, Martin JT et al. Isoflurane, but not halothane, depressed C-Fos expression in rat spinal cord at concentrations that suppress reflex movement after supramaximal noxious stimulation. Anesth Analg 2002, 95: 1622-1628.
17. Docquier M, Lavand'homme P, Ledermann C et al. Can determining the minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration of volatile anesthetic be used as an objective tool to assess antinociception in animals? Anesth Analg 2003; 97: 1033-1039.
18. Deng XM, Xiao WJ, Tang GZ et al. The minimum local anesthetic concentration of ropivacaine for caudal analgesia in children. Anesth Analg 2002; 94: 1465-1468.
19. Dong X-P, Xu T-L. The action of propofol on γ-aminobutyric acid-A and glycine receptors in acutely dissociated spinal dorsal horn neurons of the rat. Anaesth Analg 2002, 95: 907-914.
20. Ivani G, De Negri P, Lonnqvist P et al. A comparison of three different concentration of levobupivacaine for caudal block in children. Anesth Analg 2003; 97: 368-371.