COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A randomized comparison of different doses of intrathecal levobupivacaine combined with fentanyl for elective cesarean section: prospective, double-blinded study.

PURPOSE: Levobupivacaine may produce a sensory and motor block different from that produced by bupivacaine, which is the most popular local anesthetic in parturients undergoing cesarean section. The aim of this study was to investigate the block characteristics, the clinical efficacy, surgeon and patient satisfaction, and hemodynamic effects of using different doses of intrathecal plain levobupivacaine combined with fentanyl.

METHODS: One hundred twenty women undergoing elective cesarean section with a combined spinal-epidural technique were enrolled. The parturients were randomly assigned to receive one of the following: levobupivacaine 5 mg (group 5), 7.5 mg (group 7.5) or 10 mg (group 10), all combined with fentanyl 25, 15 or 10 μg, respectively.

RESULTS: Anesthesia was effective in 60, 82.5 and 100% of the patients in the levobupivacaine 5, 7.5 and 10 mg groups, respectively. Levobupivacaine 10 mg provided longer durations of analgesia and motor block and greater patient and surgeon satisfaction, although the incidence of hypotension was lower in groups 5 and 7.5 than in group 10 (12.5, 17.5 and 42.5%, respectively). Intraoperative epidural supplementation was higher in group 5 than in group 7.5 (40 and 17.5%, respectively), whereas no patients in group 10 were given an epidural bolus dose.

CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of hypotension was higher in the levobupivacaine 10 mg group, even though this group presented more effective anesthesia and greater patient and surgeon satisfaction compared with the levobupivacaine 5 and 7.5 mg groups. As a result, we believe that levobupivacaine 7.5 mg combined with fentanyl 15 μg is suitable for combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in elective cesarean section.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app