2019, Vol. 2, Issue 2, Part A
Comparative study of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% versus hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% and fentanyl in spinal anaesthesia for lower abdominal and lower extremity surgeries
Author(s): Dr. Santosh Kamshetty and Dr. Mallikarjun Panshetty
Abstract: The study was conducted to compare the differences in the onset, duration of action of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% (group-I) versus intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% and fentanyl 25 mg (group-II) in spinal anaesthesia in lower abdominal and lower extremity surgeries. The combination of bupivacaine and fentanyl helps anaesthesiologist to alleviate intraoperative discomfort by providing better analgesia to the patients without prolonging recovery. 100 patients belonging to ASA grade-I and II of both the sexes (n=50 in each group) were randomly selected for the study. The time of onset of sensory and motor block, duration of analgesia, 2-segment regression, intraoperative discomfort, time to micturition, visual analogue score, post operative analgesic requirements were assessed. The time of onset of sensory and motor block were significantly longer in group-II than group-I (P<0.001). The 2-segment regression of sensory blockade (group-I – 78.60±6.23 and group-II – 114.58±4.15 min) and regression of sensory level to L2 dermatome (group-I – 142.90±6.71 and group-II – 166.80±5.69 min) were significantly longer in group-II (P<0.001). Addition of intrathecal fentanyl 25 μg to hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia provides better quality of anaesthesia with reduced incidence of perioperative discomfort, prolonged duration of analgesia and reduced postoperative analgesic requirements.
Pages: 14-17 | Views: 1820 | Downloads: 859
Download Full Article: Click Here
How to cite this article:
Dr. Santosh Kamshetty, Dr. Mallikarjun Panshetty. Comparative study of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% versus hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% and fentanyl in spinal anaesthesia for lower abdominal and lower extremity surgeries. Int J Med Anesthesiology 2019;2(2):14-17. DOI: 10.33545/26643766.2019.v2.i2a.22