A comparison of 0.0625% bupivacaine with fentanyl and 0.1% ropivacaine with fentanyl for continuous epidural labor analgesia.

UNLABELLED: We compared the analgesic efficacy and the degree of motor block achieved with epidural infusion of 0.0625% bupivacaine (Group B) versus 0.1% ropivacaine (Group R), both with 0.0002% fentanyl (2 microg/mL) in laboring patients. A prospective, double-blinded study was performed in 98 ASA physical status I-II parturients who were divided randomly into two groups to receive either bupivacaine or ropivacaine after catheter location had been tested with an initial bolus of lidocaine and fentanyl. The infusion rate was 15 mL/h in every case. When pain was perceived, 5-mL boluses of the assigned epidural analgesic were administered every 10 min until analgesia was achieved. We recorded pain intensity, level of sensory block, degree of motor block, hemodynamic variables, secondary effects, mode of delivery, neonatal outcome, and patient satisfaction. There were no statistically significant differences in any of the factors analyzed. Highly effective analgesia was achieved in both groups with a small incidence of motor block. These findings suggest that bupivacaine may be more potent than ropivacaine. IMPLICATIONS: We compared different concentrations of epidural bupivacaine and ropivacaine thought to be equipotent. Both solutions were equally efficient in providing highly effective epidural analgesia for labor with minimal motor block. These findings suggest that bupivacaine may be more potent than ropivacaine.

A comparison of 0.5% ropivacaine and 1% mepivacaine for sciatic nerve block in the popliteal fossa.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare anesthetic efficacy and postoperative analgesia of 0.5% ropivacaine and 1% mepivacaine for sciatic nerve block in the popliteal fossa (popliteal block). METHODS: A prospective, double-blind study was carried out in 58 adult patients scheduled for outpatient foot or ankle surgery. They were randomized to receive popliteal block with 40 ml of either 0.5% ropivacaine (group R) or 1% mepivacaine (group M). An atraumatic, Teflon-coated needle connected to a neurostimulator was used to make a single puncture using a posterior approach. The times to onset of sensory and motor block, and the need for intraoperative sedation were recorded. Before discharge, patients were asked to document the time to first analgesic use, time to return of full sensation in the foot, and their evaluation of the technique. RESULTS: Onset time (mean+/-standard deviation, 95% confidence interval) of both sensory block (6.5+/-5.1 min, 4.47-8.49, in group R and 6.2+/-3.7 min, 4.83-7.69, in group M) and motor block (6.6+/-4.4 min, 4.81-8.23, in group R and 7.9+/-4.1 min, 6.29-9.53, in group M) was similar in both groups. Postoperative analgesia lasted longer in group R (15.2+/-5.1 h, 13.25-17.21) than in group M (5.7+/-1.8 h, 5.01-6.41; P<0.001). Duration of sensory block was longer in group R (20.7+/-6.2 h, 18.51-23.01) than in group M (6.5+/-1.7 h, 5.86-7.16; P<0.001). Acceptance of the anesthetic procedure was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: In this study we demonstrated that both 0.5% ropivacaine and 1% mepivacaine for popliteal block produced rapid, effective and safe anesthesia but postoperative analgesia was more long-lasting with ropivacaine.