medigraphic.com

2008, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Anest 2008; 31 (1)

Impact of the ropivacaine caudal via over the non depolarizing neuromuscular relaxation

Covarrubias VJA, Sánchez RJP, Romano MJM, Martínez TR, Díaz AMA, Bonne EA, Rionda DE

Language: Spanish
References: 28
Page: 15-20
PDF size: 181.74 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To determine if ropivacaine administered by caudal block prolongs the time of action of atracurium which was administered by endovenous, in patients undergoing to anorectal surgery. Material and methods: 40 adult patients were studied, randomly divided into 2 groups of 20 subjects each one. After the endovenous induction, a caudal block with ropivacaine of 0.1%with volume of 14 milliliters was performed into Group A, Group B was not blocked. Neuromuscular block was monitored by train of four stimulus. The length of time of atracurium was evaluated in both groups: Group A (with caudal block) and Group B (without caudal block). Results: The record of the time estimated in minutes to reach a train of four of 80% for Group A was 70.59 ± 10.32; while for Group B was 55.67 ± 10.72. (p ‹ 0.001). Was necessary to administer neostigmine in 45% of the patients in group A, in the group B only 25%. Conclusions: The caudal block with ropivacaine produces a significant statistic increasing in the length of action time on the non depolarizing neuromuscular blocking atracurium, comparing it with the control group in which ropivacaine was not applied.


REFERENCES

  1. Gudaytite J, Marchertiene I, Pavalkis D. Anesthesia for ambulatory anorectal surgery. Medicine 2004;40:100-111.

  2. Melman E. Anestesia Regional en Pediatría. En: Programa de Actualización Continua para Anestesiólogos. Edit. Científica Médica Latinoamericana e Intersistemas. 2000; Tomo II: 50-56.

  3. Melman E, Penuelas JA, Marrufo JE. Regional Anesthesia in children. Anesth Analg 1975;54:120-122.

  4. Shu-Yam W, Jihn-Yih L, Chit C, Chi-Hao T, Shiue-Chin L. Caudal epidural block for minor gynecologic procedures in outpatient surgery. Chang Gung Med J 2004;27:116-21.

  5. Medina S, Coutiño M, Vargas-Cruz S, Luna H. Bloqueo caudal para cirugía anorrectal. Cir Gen 2000;22:112-114.

  6. Morgan E, Maged S. Clinical Anesthesiology. México D.F.; Manual Moderno. Tercera edición. 2002.

  7. Susuki H, Yazaki S, Kanatama T, Ogawa S, Kuniyoshi K. Neuromuscular effects of I.A. infusion of lignocaine in man. Br J Anaesth 1997;49:1117-21.

  8. Matsuo S, Rao DBS, Chaudry I, Foldes FF. Interaction of muscle relaxants and local anesthetics at the neuromuscular junction. Anesth Analg 1978;57:580-587.

  9. Faust R. Anesthesiology Review. United States of America; Churchill-Livingstone. Tercera edición. 2002.

  10. McClure JH. Ropivacaine. Br J Anaesth 1996;76:300-307.

  11. Boselli E, Debon R, Cimino Y, Rimmelé T, Allaouchiche B. Background infusion is not beneficial during labor patient-controlled analgesia with 0.1% ropivacaine plus 0.5 µg/mL sufentanil. Anesthesiology 2004;100:968-972.

  12. Domech A, García GL. Ropivacaína versus bupivacaína en anestesia peridural para histerectomía abdominal. Rev Cubana de Anestesiología y Reanimación 2004;3:13-25.

  13. Torres-López A, Rufino J, Pérez-Rodríguez J, Sánchez JM, Aljazairi. Ropivacaína al 0.125% versus bupivacaína al 0.125% asociadas a fentanilo, en analgesia epidural obstétrica. Rev Soc Esp Dolor 1999;6:343-346.

  14. Lönnqvist PA, Westrin P, Larsson BA, Olsson G, Huledal G. Ropivacaine pharmacokinetics after caudal in 1-8 year old children. Br J Anaesth 2000;85:506-11.

  15. Khalil S, Lingadevaru H. Caudal regional anesthesia, ropivacaine concentration postoperative analgesia, and infants. Anesth Analg 2006;103:395-399.

  16. Pineda-Díaz MV, Hernández-Carrillo MA, Gerardo-De la Cruz S. Levobupivacaína comparada con ropivacaína para bloqueo caudal en pacientes pediátricos. Rev Mex Anest 2004;27;134-139.

  17. Toft P, Kirkegaard-Nielsen H, Severinsen I, Helbo-Hansen HS. Effect of peridurally administered bupivacaine on atracurium-induced neuromuscular blockade. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1990;34:649-652.

  18. Telivuo L, Katz RL. The effects of modern intravenous local analgesics on respiration during partial neuromuscular block in man. Anaesthesia 1970;25:30-35.

  19. Taivainen T, Meretoja OA, Rosenberg PH. The effect of epidural bupivacaine on vecuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade in children. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1994;38:453-456.

  20. Higuchi H, Adachi Y, Kazama T. Factors affecting the spread and duration of epidural anesthesia with ropivacaine. Anesthesiology 2004;101:451-460.

  21. Stoelting R. Local Anesthetics. In: Stoelting, R. Pharmacology and Physiology in Anesthetic Practice. United States of America; Lippincott – Raven. Tercera edición. 1999. pp 162.

  22. Miller R. Miller’s Anesthesia. United States Of America; Churchill Livingstone. Sexta edición. 2005.

  23. Hansen T, Llett K, Reid C, Lim S, Hackett P, Bergesio R. Caudal ropivacaine in infants. Anesthesiology 2001;94:579-584.

  24. Lee C-M. Train-of-4 quantitation of competitive neuromuscular block. Anesth Analg 1975;54:649-653.

  25. Nepveu M, Donatti F, Fortier L. Train-of-four stimulation for abductor pollicis neuromuscular monitoring can be applied at the wrist or over the hand. Anesth Analg 2005;100:149-154.

  26. Padmaja D, Mantha S. Monitoring of neuromuscular junction. Indian J Anaesth 2002;46:279-288.

  27. Dupuis JY, Martin R, Tessonnier JM, Tetrault JP. Clinical assessment of the muscular response to titanic nerve stimulation. Can J Anaesth 1990;37:397-400.

  28. Engbaek J, Ostergaard D, Vihy-Mogersen J, Skovgaars LT. Clinical recovery and train-of-four measured mechanically a electromyographically following atracurium. Anesthesiology 1989;71:391-395.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com