Effect of ropivacaine combined with sufentanil epidural anesthesia in abdominal surgery.

To explore and analyze the effect of ropivacaine plus sufentanil for epidural anesthesia during abdominal surgery, a total of 120 patients who underwent abdominal surgery at our institution between May 2019 and November 2020 were recruited and randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive either ropivacaine alone for epidural anesthesia (control group) or ropivacaine plus sufentanil (observation group). The total anesthesia effect in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group (96.66% vs 78.33%) (P<0.05). The combined anesthesia resulted in significantly lower visual analogue scale (VAS) scores (1.51±0.84, 1.63±0.56, 1.69±0.63, 1.54±0.42) in patients at 4h, 8h, 16h and 24h postoperatively versus ropivacaine alone (2.35±0.88, 2.49±0. 69, 2.47±0.78, 2.39±0.58) (P<0.05). The Ramsay sedation score (RSS) scores (1.98±0.81, 2.44±0.62, 2.18±0.62, 2.51±0.37) of the observation group at 4h, 8h, 16h and 24h after operation were significantly lower than those of the control group (1.42±0.52, 1.73±0.71, 1.47±0.66, 1.68±0.62) (P<0.05). Patients receiving ropivacaine plus sufentanil were associated with a lower incidence of adverse reactions than those given ropivacaine only (5.00% vs 30.00%) (P<0.05). In abdominal surgery, ropivacaine plus sufentanil epidural anesthesia resulted in reduced postoperative pain, enhanced sedative effects and a lower risk of adverse reactions versus ropivacaine alone.

Analgesic effects of different concentrations of ropivacaine in transversalis fascia plane block during laparotomy.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the analgesic effects of different concentrations of ropivacaine in transversalis fascia plane (TFP) block during laparotomy. METHODS: Ninety patients who underwent laparotomy admitted to our hospital from March 2019 to March 2020 were selected as the study subjects and were divided equally into a low concentration group, a medium concentration group, and a high concentration group according to the randomized grouping method. The low concentration group adopted 0.4% ropivacaine 40 ml, the medium concentration group was given 0.5% ropivacaine 40 ml, and the high concentration group was given 0.6% ropivacaine 40 ml. The hemodynamic indexes and the incidence of adverse reactions in the two groups were compared. The Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) was used to assess the postoperative pain in the three groups, the Bruggrmann comfort scale (BCS) was used to assess the comfort level in the three groups, and the Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) was used to evaluate the postoperative cognitive function of the three groups of patients. RESULTS: The mean artery pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) levels at T1 and T2 were significantly lower in the medium concentration group than in the other two groups (P < 0.05). The low concentration group had a significantly higher NRS score at T2 than the medium concentration group and the high concentration group (P < 0.05). A significantly higher BCS score was observed in the high concentration group than the other two groups (P < 0.05). There were significantly higher Ramsay scores and MMSE scores in the medium concentration group than in the low concentration and high concentration groups (P < 0.05). The overall incidence of adverse reactions of the high concentration group was significantly higher than that of the low concentration group (P < 0.05), but showed similar results with the medium concentration group. CONCLUSION: The medium concentration group exhibits a better analgesic effect than the low concentration group and higher safety than the high concentration group. Therefore, the use of medium concentration ropivacaine in TFP block may provide a referential basis for clinical treatment.