Sciatic nerve block with 0.5% levobupivacaine, 0.75% levobupivacaine or 0.75% ropivacaine

A randomized trial: The safety, pharmacokinetics and preliminary pharmacodynamics of ropivacaine oil delivery depot in healthy subjects

INTRODUCTION

Ropivacaine oil delivery depot (RODD) can slowly release ropivacaine and block nerves for a long timejavascript:;. The aim of the present work was to investigate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary pharmacodynamics of RODD in subcutaneous injection among healthy subjects.

METHODS

The abdomens of 3 subjects were subcutaneously administered with a single-needle RODD containing 12~30 mg of ropivacaine. The irritation, nerve blocking range and optimum dose were investigated. Forty-one subjects were divided into RODD groups containing 150, 230, 300, 350 and 400 mg of ropivacaine and a ropivacaine hydrochloride injection (RHI) 150 mg group. Multineedle subcutaneous injection of RODD or RHI was performed in the abdomens of the subjects. The primary endpoint was a safe dose or a maximum dose of ropivacaine (400 mg). Subjects' vital signs were observed; their blood was analyzed; their cardiovascular system and nervous systems were monitored, and their dermatological reactions were observed and scored. Second, the ropivacaine concentrations in plasma were determined, pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated, and the anesthetic effects of RODD were studied, including RODD onset time, duration and intensity of nerve block.

RESULTS

Single-needle injection of RODD 24 mg was optimal for 3 subjects, and the range of nerve block was 42.5±20.8 mm. Multineedle subcutaneous injection of RODD in the abdomens of subjects was safe, and all adverse events were no more severe than grade II. The incidence rate of grade II adverse events, such as pain, and abnormal ST and ST-T segment changes on electrocardiography, was approximately 1%. The incidence rate of grade I adverse events, including erythema, papules, hypertriglyceridemia, and hypotension was greater than 10%. Erythema and papules were relieved after 24 h and disappeared after 72 h. Other adverse reactions disappeared after 7 days. The curve of ropivacaine concentration-time in plasma presented a bimodal profile. The results showed that ropivacaine was slowly released from the RODD. Compared with the 150 mg RHI group, Tmax was longer in the RODD groups. In particular, Tmax in the 400 mg RODD group was longer than that in the RHI group (11.8±4.6 h vs. 0.77±0.06 h). The Cmax in the 150 mg RODD group was lower than that in the 150 mg RHI group (0.35±0.09 vs. 0.58±0.13 μg·mL-1). In particular, the Cmax increased by 48% when the dose was increased by 2.6 times in the 400 mg group. Cmax, the AUC value and the intensity of the nerve block increased with increasing doses of RODD. Among them, the 400 mg RODD group presented the strongest nerve block (the percentage of level 2 and 3, 42.9%). The corresponding median onset time was 0.42 h, and the duration median was 35.7⁓47.7 h.

CONCLUSIONS

RODD has a sustained release effect. Compared with the RHI group, Tmax was delayed in the RODD groups, and the duration of nerve block was long. No abnormal reaction was found in the RODD group containing 400 mg of ropivacaine after subcutaneous injection among healthy subjects, suggesting that RODD was adequately safe.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chictr.org: CTR2200058122; Chinadrugtrials.org: CTR20192280.

Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve Block for Postoperative Pain Control After Total Hip Arthroplasty Using the Direct Anterior Approach: A Single-blinded Randomized Control Trial

Background

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) employing the direct anterior approach (DAA) is increasingly performed as a less invasive procedure with faster recovery than other approaches. Unlike other approaches, the skin incision is made on the lateral thigh, distal to the inguinal ligament. However, the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) block for postoperative analgesia after THA using DAA has not been investigated.We hypothesized that ultrasound-guided LFCN block using DAA would reduce postoperative pain after THA.

Methods

A prospective, randomized, observer-blinded controlled trial was conducted. The 92 patients included were divided into two groups: those who received only femoral nerve block (FNB group) and those who received femoral nerve block and LFCN block with 10mL of 0.25% levobupivacaine (FNB + LFCNB group). Both groups received intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (fentanyl) postoperatively. A numerical rating scale was used to quantify pain at 3 and 48 h postoperatively.

Results

There was no significant difference in pain at rest and during movement between the FNB and FNB + LFCNB groups (at rest: Z = -1.6814, p=0.0927; during on movement: Z = -0.9677, p=0.9487). There was also no significant difference in pain severity at rest and during movement between the FNB and FNB + LFCNB groups postoperatively.

Conclusions

LFCNB did not improve postoperative pain relief in patients undergoing THA with DAA.

Effect of Intramuscular Tramadol on the Duration of Clinically Relevant Sciatic Nerve Blockade in Patients Undergoing Calcaneal Fracture Fixation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Calcaneal fracture fixation can generate severe postoperative pain and analgesia can be supported by a sciatic nerve block. However, following resolution of the sensory blockade, rebound pain may ensue. The aim of this study was to assess whether an incidental finding of two patients with an extension of the sciatic nerve block beyond 24 h following 100 mg of intramuscular tramadol administration could be confirmed.

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients scheduled for a calcaneal intramedullary fixation (Calcanail^®) were randomly divided into two groups. The tramadol group (n = 19) received a sciatic nerve block with 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine and a concomitant dose of 100 mg of intramuscular tramadol, while the control group (n = 18) received an identical sciatic nerve block with concomitant injection of normal saline (placebo). All patients had a spinal anesthesia with light sedation for the procedure. The time to first analgesic request defined as appearance of any pain (NRS > 0) was assessed as the primary endpoint with a clinically relevant expected result of at least 50% elongation in sensory blockade.

RESULTS

The median time to first analgesic request from time of blockade in the tramadol group was 670 min compared with 578 min in the control group. The result was clinically not relevant and statistically not significant (p = 0.17). No statistical difference could be demonstrated in the time to first opioid request, although a trend for opioid sparing in the tramadol group could be seen. Total morphine consumption in the first 24 h was also statistically insignificant (the tramadol group 0.066 mg kg^-1 compared with 0.125 mg kg^-1 in the control group). In conclusion, intramuscular tramadol does not extend the duration of analgesia of a sciatic nerve block following a calcaneal fracture fixation beyond 2 h and an opioid sparing effect could not be demonstrated in this trial.

Pharmacodynamics, toxicology and toxicokinetics of ropivacaine oil delivery depot

BACKGROUND

Ropivacaine oil delivery depot (RODD) can be used to treat postoperative incision pain. The aim was to study pharmacodynamics, toxicity and toxicokinetics of RODD.

METHODS

The base research of RODD were conducted. Thirty rabbits were randomly divided into saline, solvent, ropivacaine aqueous injection (RAI) 0.9 mg, RODD 0.9 mg and RODD 3 mg groups. The sciatic nerve of rabbits were isolated, dripped with RODD and the effect of nerve block were observed. In toxicity study, the rats were divided into saline, solvent and RODD 75, 150 and 300 mg/kg groups, 30 rats per group. In toxicokinetics, rats were divided into RODD 75, 150 and 300 mg/kg groups, 18 rats per group. The rats were subcutaneously injected drugs.

RESULTS

The analgesic duration of RODD 3 mg and RAI 0.9 mg blocking ischiadic nerve lasted about 20 h and 2 h, respectively, and their blocking intensity was similar. The rats in RODD 75 mg/kg did not show any toxicity. Compared with saline group, in RODD 150 mg/kg group neutrophils and mononuclear cells increased, lymphocytes decreased and albumin decreased(P < 0.05), and pathological examination showed some abnormals. In RODD 300 mg/kg group, 10 rats died and showed some abnormalities in central nerve system, hematologic indexes, part of biochemical indexes, and the weights of spleen, liver, and thymus. However, these abnormal was largely recovered on 14 days after the dosing. The results of toxicokinetics of RODD 75 mg/kg group showed that the Cmax was 1.24 ± 0.59 µg/mL and the AUC(0-24 h) was 11.65 ± 1.58 h·µg/mL.

CONCLUSIONS

Subcutaneous injection RODD releases ropivacaine slowly, and shows a stable and longer analgesic effect with a large safety range.

L-bupivacaine Inhibition of Nociceptive Transmission in Rat Peripheral and Dorsal Horn Neurons

BACKGROUND

Although the widely used single L-enantiomers of local anesthetics have less toxic effects on the cardiovascular and central nervous systems, the mechanisms mediating their antinociceptive actions are not well understood. The authors hypothesized that significant differences in the ion channel blocking abilities of the enantiomers of bupivacaine would be identified.

METHODS

The authors performed electrophysiologic analysis on rat dorsal root ganglion neurons in vitro and on spinal transmissions in vivo.

RESULTS

In the dorsal root ganglion, these anesthetics decreased the amplitudes of action potentials. The half-maximum inhibitory concentrations of D-enantiomer D-bupivacaine were almost equal for Aβ (29.5 μM), Aδ (29.7μM), and C (29.8 μM) neurons. However, the half-maximum inhibitory concentrations of L-bupivacaine was lower for Aδ (19.35 μM) and C (19.5 μM) neurons than for A β (79.4 μM) neurons. Moreover, D-bupivacaine almost equally inhibited tetrodotoxin-resistant (mean ± SD: 15.8 ± 10.9% of the control, n = 14, P < 0.001) and tetrodotoxin-sensitive (15.4 ± 15.6% of the control, n = 11, P = 0.004) sodium currents. In contrast, L-bupivacaine suppressed tetrodotoxin-resistant sodium currents (26.1 ± 19.5% of the control, n = 18, P < 0.001) but not tetrodotoxin-sensitive sodium currents (74.5 ± 18.2% of the control, n = 11, P = 0.477). In the spinal dorsal horn, L-bupivacaine decreased the area of pinch-evoked excitatory postsynaptic currents (39.4 ± 11.3% of the control, n = 7, P < 0.001) but not touch-evoked responses (84.2 ± 14.5% of the control, n = 6, P = 0.826). In contrast, D-bupivacaine equally decreased pinch- and touch-evoked responses (38.8 ± 9.5% of the control, n = 6, P = 0.001, 42.9 ± 11.8% of the control, n = 6, P = 0.013, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the L-enantiomer of bupivacaine (L-bupivacaine) effectively inhibits noxious transmission to the spinal dorsal horn by blocking action potential conduction through C and Aδ afferent fibers.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Lower extremity regional anesthesia: essentials of our current understanding

The advent of ultrasound guidance has led to a renewed interest in regional anesthesia of the lower limb. In keeping with the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine's ongoing commitment to provide intensive evidence-based education, this article presents a complete update of the 2005 comprehensive review on lower extremity peripheral nerve blocks. The current review article strives to (1) summarize the pertinent anatomy of the lumbar and sacral plexuses, (2) discuss the optimal approaches and techniques for lower limb regional anesthesia, (3) present evidence to guide the selection of pharmacological agents and adjuvants, (4) describe potential complications associated with lower extremity nerve blocks, and (5) identify informational gaps pertaining to outcomes, which warrant further investigation.

Comparison of 0.5% Ropivacaine and 0.5% Levobupivacaine for Sciatic Nerve Block Using Labat Approach in Foot and Ankle Surgery

Objective

Compared to ropivacaine, levobupivacaine is more lipophilic and a more potent vasoconstrictor. The study was conducted to compare the effect of 0.5% ropivacaine and 0.5% levobupivacaine in sciatic nerve block using conventional Labat approach in foot and ankle surgery.

Methods

A prospective double-blind, randomised study was carried out in 100 patients of either sex, aged between 20 to 60 years, and American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) grades I and II. Patients were randomly allocated into groups R and L of 50 each with 0.5% ropivacaine and 0.5% levobupivacaine, respectively, for sciatic nerve block using the Labat approach. We assessed the onset and duration of sensory and motor block, duration of analgesia, consumption of analgesic, and any untoward effect over 24 hours.

Results

Both the groups were comparable with regard to demographic variables and onset of sensory and motor block (p>0.05). Group L compared to group R had significantly longer median (95% confidence interval) duration of sensory block (647.50 min [624.99-674.41] vs. 535 min [524.77-559.83], respectively; p<0.0001) as well as motor block (1065.0 min [1054.5-1068.90] and 945 min [947.13-1013.30], respectively; p<0.0001). Postoperative analgesia also lasted significantly longer in group L compared to group R (1320 min [1273.4-1321.8] vs. 840 min [759.23-812.77]; p<0.0001]). Patients in group L had significantly better visual analogue scale (VAS) score and lesser consumption of analgesics (p<0.0001). None of the groups developed any adverse effect over the observation period.

Conclusion

Levobupivacaine provides prolonged postoperative analgesia in sciatic nerve block with reduction in postoperative analgesic consumption.

Ropivacaine versus levobupivacaine in peripheral nerve block: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To determine which is more potent in peripheral nerve block between ropivacaine and levobupivacaine.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in the EMBASE, Medline, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science. The trials that were found were then evaluated for eligibility. The Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager software was used to perform the meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Twelve studies including 556 patients were included for final analysis. No statistically significant difference was observed between the 2 drugs with respect to onset time of surgical anesthesia, onset time of sensory block, onset time of motor block, duration of motor block, and patients overall satisfaction. Levobupivacaine provided more long-term anesthesia (weighted mean difference [WMD], -2.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.56 to -0.32; I = 93%) and significantly lower incidence of postoperative rescue analgesia (odds ratio [OR], 2.11; 95% CI 1.18-3.74; I = 21%) than ropivacaine. There was a trend toward greater duration of sensory block in the levobupivacaine group (WMD, -1.16; 95% CI, -1.89 to -0.43; I = 14%).

CONCLUSION

Levobupivacaine is more potent than ropivacaine in peripheral nerve block to some extent. Otherwise, more rigorous randomized control trials are required in the future.

Postoperative analgesia comparing levobupivacaine and ropivacaine for brachial plexus block: A randomized prospective trial

BACKGROUND

On a pharmacologic basis, levobupivacaine is expected to last longer than ropivacaine. However, most reports of these anesthetics for brachial plexus block do not suggest a difference in analgesic effect. The aim of this study is to compare the postoperative analgesic effects of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine when used for treating ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block.

METHODS

A total of 62 patients undergoing orthopedic surgery procedures were prospectively enrolled and randomized to receive levobupivacaine (group L, N = 31) or ropivacaine (group R, N = 31). The duration of analgesia, offset time of motor block, need for rescue analgesics, and sleep disturbance on the night of surgery were recorded. Pain score was recorded on the day of surgery, and on postoperative days 1 and 2.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the time interval until the first request for pain medication comparing the two groups (group L: 15.6 [11.4, 16.8] hours; group R: 12.5 [9.4, 16.0] hours, P = 0.32). There was no difference in the duration of motor block (group L: 12.2 [7.6, 14.4] hours; group R: 9.4 [7.9, 13.2] hours, P = 0.44), pain score (P = 0.92), need for rescue analgesics (group L: 55%; group R: 65%, P = 0.6), or rate of sleep disturbance (group L: 61%, group R: 58%, P = 1.0) on comparing the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in postoperative analgesia comparing levobupivacaine and ropivacaine when used for brachial plexus block.

Efficacy of Sciatic Nerve Block for Pain Management in below Knee Orthopaedic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Perioperative pain management is an integral part of anaesthesia and patients are most satisfied if there is minimal or no pain after surgery. Sciatic nerve block provides postoperative pain relief after below knee surgery and knee surgery. Many studies with different approaches for sciatic nerve block have been conducted to demonstrate the efficacy of sciatic nerve block with different local anaesthetic drugs over the past decade.

AIM

To study the efficacy of single-shot sciatic nerve block for postoperative pain management in below knee orthopaedic surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty patients of American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade I and II aged 18 to 60 years of either sex (male or female) scheduled for unilateral below knee open orthopaedic surgery under spinal anaesthesia and ready to participate in this study were included. Sciatic nerve block with Bupivacaine was given by classic (posterior) approach of Labat using peripheral nerve stimulator and /or ultra sound. Intraoperatively heart rate, noninvasive mean BP, respiratory rate, ECG, SpO₂ was monitored. Pain was assessed using "Visual Analogue Scale" (VAS) postoperatively. Diclofenac sodium was given as rescue analgesia when VAS was > 3. Time of supplemental analgesia was noted.

RESULTS

Mean VAS was maximum at 18 hours, 16 (26.7%) patients did not require any rescue analgesia, whereas 93.4% patients did not require rescue analgesia upto 18 hours after surgery. Mean VAS score of the patients who did not require rescue analgesia was 2.06 at 24 hours postoperatively which is far below the level where rescue analgesia was required. The mean time by which rescue analgesia was given was 19.3 hours with standard deviation of ± 3 hours. Inj. diclofenac sodium 75 mg was given intravenously as rescue analgesia when VAS score exceeded 3. No adverse systemic toxicity of Bupivacaine was observed within 24 hours after the operation.

CONCLUSION

Single shot sciatic nerve block provided effective pain relief to majority of the patients upto 18 hours in below knee orthopaedic surgery and also decreased analgesic drugs requirement postoperatively. Sciatic nerve block was safe with no adverse effects.

0.5% levobupivacaine versus 0.5% ropivacaine: Are they different in ultrasound-guided sciatic block?

Context and Aims:

Little is known about onset and duration of sciatic block after 0.5% levobupivacaine (Levo) versus 0.5% ropivacaine (Ropi) for ultrasound-guided technique. We assessed these parameters in the ultrasound-guided block, to know for the practice.

Setting and Design:

A comparative randomized double-blind study was conducted in the University Hospital.

Materials and Methods:

Were included 35 adults of ASA I-II, scheduled for foot surgery, presenting clear imaging of their sciatic nerve at mid-thigh. A volume of 20 mL of either 0.5% Levo or 0.5% Ropi were injected around the sciatic nerve at mid-thigh using ultrasound guidance (out of the plane) followed by placement of a catheter to use, if necessary, for perioperative analgesia. A femoral single shot block was systematically performed to block the saphenous nerve. The onset times until complete foot block (primary outcome) and the sensory and motor block duration (secondary outcome) were assessed using Wilcoxon test. Values were expressed as medians (1^st-3^rd quartile).

Results:

Except for two delayed sciatic blocks in each group, the onset time otherwise was 35 min (20-60) in Ropi versus 40 min (30-60) in Levo, P = 0.5. Sensory block lasted longer in Levo, 17 h (14-27) compared with 15 h (10-17) in Ropi, P = 0.04. No significant between-group difference was found with motor block durations, 15 h (12-18) in Levo and 15 h (12-16) in Ropi, P = 0.3.

Conclusion:

No difference of onset times was found in ultrasound-guided sciatic block whether using Levo or Ropi. Levo induced a longer-lasting sensory block.

Pain Management for Elective Foot and Ankle Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Pain after foot and ankle surgery can significantly affect the postoperative outcomes. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials assessing postoperative pain after foot and ankle surgery, because the surgery will lead to moderate-to-severe postoperative pain, but the optimal pain therapy has been controversial. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials in English reporting on pain after foot and ankle surgery in adults published from January 1946 to February 2013 was performed. The primary outcome measure was the postoperative pain scores. The secondary outcome measures included supplemental analgesic requirements and other recovery outcomes. With 953 studies identified, 45 met the inclusion criteria. The approaches improving pain relief (reduced pain scores or opioid requirements) included peripheral nerve blocks, wound infiltration, intravenous dexamethasone, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors, and opioids. Wound instillation, intra-articular injection, and intravenous regional analgesia had variable analgesia. The lack of homogeneous study design precluded quantitative analyses. Optimal pain management strategies included locoregional analgesic techniques plus acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors, with opioids used for "rescue," and 1 intraoperative dose of parenteral dexamethasone. Popliteal sciatic nerve blocks would be appropriate when expecting severe postoperative pain (extensive surgical procedure), and ankle blocks and surgical incision infiltration would be appropriate when expecting moderate postoperative pain (less extensive and minimally invasive surgical procedures). Additional studies are needed to assess multimodal analgesia techniques.

Clinical profile of levobupivacaine in regional anesthesia: A systematic review

The quest for searching newer and safer anesthetic agents has always been one of the primary needs in anesthesiology practice. Levobupivacaine, the pure S (−)-enantiomer of bupivacaine, has strongly emerged as a safer alternative for regional anesthesia than its racemic sibling, bupivacaine. Levobupivacaine has been found to be equally efficacious as bupivacaine, but with a superior pharmacokinetic profile. Clinically, levobupivacaine has been observed to be well-tolerated in regional anesthesia techniques both after bolus administration and continuous post-operative infusion. The incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is rare when it is administered correctly. Most ADRs are related to faulty administration technique (resulting in systemic exposure) or pharmacological effects of anesthesia; however, allergic reactions can also occur rarely. The available literary evidence in anesthesia practice indicates that levobupivacaine and bupivacaine produce comparable surgical sensory block, similar adverse side effects and provision of similar labor analgesia with good comparable maternal and fetal outcome. The present review aims to discuss the pharmacokinetic and pharmacological essentials of the safer profile of levobupivacaine as well as to discuss the scope and indications of levobupivacaine based on current clinical evidence.

Preventive analgesia by local anesthetics: the reduction of postoperative pain by peripheral nerve blocks and intravenous drugs

The use of local anesthetics to reduce acute postoperative pain has a long history, but recent reports have not been systematically reviewed. In addition, the need to include only those clinical studies that meet minimum standards for randomization and blinding must be adhered to. In this review, we have applied stringent clinical study design standards to identify publications on the use of perioperative local anesthetics. We first examined several types of peripheral nerve blocks, covering a variety of surgical procedures, and second, we examined the effects of intentionally administered IV local anesthetic (lidocaine) for suppression of postoperative pain. Thirdly, we have examined publications in which vascular concentrations of local anesthetics were measured at different times after peripheral nerve block procedures, noting the incidence when those levels reached ones achieved during intentional IV administration. Importantly, the very large number of studies using neuraxial blockade techniques (epidural, spinal) has not been included in this review but will be dealt with separately in a later review. The overall results showed a strongly positive effect of local anesthetics, by either route, for suppressing postoperative pain scores and analgesic (opiate) consumption. In only a few situations were the effects equivocal. Enhanced effectiveness with the addition of adjuvants was not uniformly apparent. The differential benefits between drug delivery before, during, or immediately after a surgical procedure are not obvious, and a general conclusion is that the significant antihyperalgesic effects occur when the local anesthetic is present during the acute postoperative period, and its presence during surgery is not essential for this action.

[Comparison of 3 combinations of 0.5% levobupivacaine and 1% mepivacaine in popliteal sciatic block in hallux valgus outpatient surgery]

BACKGROUND

To compare 3 combinations of 0.5% levobupivacaine (L) and 1% mepivacaine (M) for popliteal block for hallux valgus surgery.

METHODS

Prospective, double blind study of 120 patients undergoing unilateral hallux valgus outpatient surgery with posterior popliteal block with ultrasound-guided single injection. Patients were randomly allocated into three groups: G1: 20mL L+10mL M; G2: 10mL L+20mL M; and G3: 15mL L+15mL M. Recorded variables were: time of block, onset and reversal times for tibial and peroneal nerves block; postoperative pain until the 7(th) day by means of visual analogue scale (VAS), simple descriptive scale and the quality of nocturnal rest, complications, and patient satisfaction. ANOVA and chi2 were applied in the statistical analysis, with a P<0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

Groups were homogeneous for demographic and surgical characteristics. None of the patients required intraoperative complementary analgesia or anaesthesia. Block onset was significantly longer in G1 than in G2 and G3 (39.4±14.7 versus 32.2±16.5 and 33.2±12minutes). Recovery time from sensory and motor block was significantly longer in G1 than in G2 and G3 (29.5±9.3 versus 22.2±8.2 and 24.8±7.9hours). Postoperative pain level was below VAS 30 (1-100) in the three groups; none of the patients experienced severe pain. Maximum pain level appeared at 24h postoperatively. Patient satisfaction was high and there were no complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Block onset time and anaesthetic efficacy was adequate in the three groups. The combination of 20mL levobupivacaine 0.5% with 10mL mepivacaine 1% provide a good alternative for a lasting postoperative analgesia.

The efficacy of 0.75% levobupivacaine versus 0.75% ropivacaine for peribulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the anesthetic efficacy and the postoperative analgesic effects of 0.75% levobupivacaine versus 0.75% ropivacaine for peribulbar anesthesia in patients undergoing primary vitreoretinal surgery.

METHODS

We investigated 120 patients subjected to vitreoretinal surgery under peribulbar anesthesia. They were randomized into two equal groups according to the local anesthetic (LA) used, namely, 0.75% levobupivacaine or 0.75% ropivacaine, both with the addition of hyaluronidase. Nerve block was carried out by injection of 5-7 mL of the LA using single injection percutaneous peribulbar anesthesia with a short needle.

RESULTS

When compared with 0.75% ropivacaine, 0.75% levobupivacaine provided more successful akinesia at 10 min after block (P=0.026), fewer supplementary injections (P=0.026), and less volume (mL) was used (P=0.031). Also, levobupivacaine provided significantly longer motor block duration (342±27 min versus 206±40 min, P=0.001) and significantly longer sensory block duration (513±24 min versus 394±11 min, P=0.001) when compared with ropivacaine. In the postoperative period, the patients in the levobupivacaine group achieved lower values of verbal numeric rating scale of pain compared with patients in the ropivacaine group among the period from 4 to 12 h. Also, there were significantly (P=0.001) lower diclofenac consumption (mg) and the percentage of patients who required tramadol rescue medication were significantly less (P=0.034) in the levobupivacaine group compared with the ropivacaine group.

CONCLUSION

We are concluding that, at equipotent doses and concentrations, 0.75% levobupivacaine provides more effective peribulbar anesthesia and more effective postoperative analgesia for vitreoretinal surgery compared with 0.75% ropivacaine.

Update on local anesthetics: focus on levobupivacaine

In recent years levobupivacaine, the pure S (−)-enantiomer of bupivacaine, emerged as a safer alternative for regional anesthesia than its racemic parent. It demonstrated less affinity and strength of depressant effects onto myocardial and central nervous vital centers in pharmacodynamic studies, and a superior pharmacokinetic profile. Clinically, levobupivacaine is well tolerated in a variety of regional anesthesia techniques both after bolus administration and continuous postoperative infusion. Reports of toxicity with levobupivacaine are scarce and occasional toxic symptoms are usually reversible with minimal treatment with no fatal outcome. Yet, levobupivacaine has not entirely replaced bupivacaine in clinical practice. In anesthesia and analgesia practice, levobupivacaine and bupivacaine produce comparable surgical sensory block with similar adverse side effects, and equal labor pain control with comparable maternal and fetal outcome. The equipotency of the two drugs has been recently questioned, prompting clinicians to increase the dose of levobupivacaine in an attempt to ensure adequate anesthesia and analgesia and offsetting, therefore, the advantages of less motor block with levobupivacaine. In this review we aim to discuss the pharmacological essentials of the safer profile of levobupivacaine, and analyze the evidence regarding the current clinical indications.

[Ultrasound-guided single dose injection of 0.5% levobupivacaine or 0.5% ropivacaine for a popliteal fossa nerve block in unilateral hallux valgus surgery]

OBJECTIVE

To compare the perioperative analgesic efficacy of 0.5% levobupivacaine and 0.5% ropivacaine injected in a single dose to block the tibial and peroneal nerves for surgery using a posterior (popliteal fossa) approach.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective randomized trial in patients undergoing hallux valgus surgery; anesthesia was provided by blocking nerves in the popliteal fossa with either 0.5% levobupivacaine or 0.5% ropivacaine. Variables studied were times until anesthetic block onset and reversal, need for additional sedation or peripheral block anesthetic, course of postoperative pain at 12, 24 and 48 hours and at 7 days, nighttime rest, need for additional analgesia, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients were enrolled. Times until onset of the sensory and motor blocks were similar in the 2 groups. For 57.1% of the patients, the sensory and motor block lasted 24 hours after surgery, with no between-group differences. The levobupivacaine group had less pain at rest 24 hours after surgery (mean [SD] visual analog scale score of 0.16 [0375] vs. 1.17 [1.88] in the ropivacaine group; P < .05). No patient reported severe pain or required additional analgesics. None were readmitted. More than 80% rested well at night. No between-group differences were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a single dose of either levobupivacaine or ropivacaine to provide anesthesia for a popliteal approach to hallux valgus surgery is effective for controlling postoperative pain.

Levobupivacaine 0.5% provides longer analgesia after sciatic nerve block using the Labat approach than the same dose of ropivacaine in foot and ankle surgery

BACKGROUND

Levobupivacaine and ropivacaine are 2 left enantiomeric molecules frequently used for peripheral nerve blocks because of their safe clinical profile. Levobupivacaine is more lipophilic and theoretically more potent than ropivacaine, but clinical studies show conflicting results in terms of anesthetic and analgesic characteristics. We hypothesized that the pure S-enantiomer of bupivacaine provides longer-lasting analgesia than ropivacaine.

METHODS

We compared the analgesic characteristics of 20 mL levobupivacaine versus 20 mL ropivacaine 0.5% in a posterior sciatic nerve block (Labat approach) for foot and ankle surgery. In a double-blind, randomized, prospective design, 80 patients received either substance. We assessed the onset, duration, and success of the block, and the need for rescue analgesia and technical or neurologic complications over 24 hours.

RESULTS

The onset of sensory block (minutes) and the success rate were similar in levobupivacaine and ropivacaine groups (onset, 15 minutes [5-40 minutes] vs 15 minutes [5-60 minutes], respectively; success rate, 90% vs 92.5%). The average time for the first request of pain medication provided by 20 mL levobupivacaine 0.5% was significantly longer than with ropivacaine (1605 minutes [575-2400 minutes] vs 1035 minutes [590-1500 minutes], P < 0.001). The need for postoperative rescue analgesia was higher in the ropivacaine group (37 of 40 [92.5%] vs 30 of 40 [75%], P < 0.034). No complications were noted in either group at 24 hours.

CONCLUSION

Twenty milliliters levobupivacaine 0.5% in posterior gluteal (Labat) sciatic nerve block provided longer-lasting analgesia after foot and ankle surgery compared with the same dose of ropivacaine.

Arthroscopic lateral release and percutaneous distal osteotomy for hallux valgus: a preliminary report

Distal osteotomy of the first metatarsal is frequently used for the treatment of hallux valgus deformity. The great toe arthroscopy is a safe procedure to perform a distal soft tissue release and a complete evaluation of the first metatarsal-phalangeal joint. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of the arthroscopic distal soft tissue release with a distal percutaneous osteotomy in the treatment of hallux valgus deformity. From January 1, 2003, to August 1, 2006, 59 consecutive procedures were performed in 49 patients. Clinical evaluation was calculated using the hallux score of the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS). The mean follow up was 31.48 (range, 12 to 48) months and the AOFAS score improved from 45 (range, 30 to 65) points to 90.61 (range, 75 to 100). The excellent results obtained encourage the authors to go on treat the hallux valgus deformity with this combination of two minimal invasive procedures.

Multi-modal-analgesia for pain management after Hallux Valgus surgery: a prospective randomised study on the effect of ankle block

BACKGROUND

Pain and emesis are the two major complaints after day case surgery. Local anaesthesia has become an important part of optimizing intra and post-operative pain treatment, but is sometimes not entirely sufficient. The aim of the present study was to study the effect of adding an ankle block to a multi-modal analgesic approach on the first 24-hour-need for rescue analgesia in patients undergoing elective Hallux Valgus surgery.

TYPE OF STUDY

Prospective, randomized patient-blind study comparing ankle block with levo-bupivacaine, lidocaine and Saline placebo control.

METHODS

Ninety patients were studied comparing ankle block (15 cc) using levo-bupivacaine 2.5 mg/ml, lidocaine 10 mg/ml or placebo (saline) on day-case elective Hallux Valgus surgery, supported by general anaesthesia in all cases. Primary study endpoint was number of patient's requiring oral analgesics during the first 24 post-operative hours.

RESULTS

Ankle block had no effect on need for rescue analgesia and pain ratings during the 1st 24 postoperative hours, there was no difference seen between placebo and any of the two active local anaesthesia studied. The only differences seen was that both lidocaine and levo-bupivacaine reduced the intra-operative need for anaesthetic (sevoflurane) and that levo-bupivacaine patients had a lower need as compared to the lidocaine patients for oral analgesics during the afternoon of surgery.

CONCLUSION

Adding a single shot ankle block to a multi-modal pain management strategy reduces the need for intra-operative anaesthesia but has no major impact of need of rescue analgesics or pain during the first 24-hour after surgery.