Comparision of the Postoperative Analgesic Efficacy of Bupivacaine 0.125% 1ml/kg versus Bupivacaine 0.125% 1ml/kg and Fentanyl 1 µg/kg for Caudal Analgesia in Paediatric Patients undergoing Short Surgical Procedures

Journal Title: Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia - Year 2017, Vol 4, Issue 4

Abstract

Aims: To compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of bupivacaine 0.125%1ml/kg versus bupivacaine 0.125% 1ml/kg and fentanyl 1 µg/kg for caudal anaesthesia in paediatric patients undergoing short surgical procedures. Settings and Design: Sixty children in the age group 1-6 years posted for routine paediatric short surgical procedures below the umbilicus were included. The data was collected in the prepared proforma consisting of age, sex, etc. meeting the objectives of the study. Patients and Methods: The 60 children were randomly divided into two groups of 30 each. Group I received 1ml/kg of 0.125% bupivacaine and Group II received 1ml/kg of 0.125% bupivacaine plus fentanyl 1µg/kg for caudal block. Postoperative analgesic efficacy was compared between two groups. Statistical Analysis: was done using students‘t’ test and chi-square test. Results: The maximum total duration of analgesia noted among both groups I and II was 510 minutes. Mean total duration of analgesia was 341.5±68.23 min in group I, whereas it was 401.5 ± 44.8 min in group II. The mean total duration of analgesia was more in group II, than in group I, which was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The total duration of postoperative analgesia was significantly longer in children receiving 0.125% bupivacaine 1ml/kg plus fentanyl 1µg/kg (401.5±44.89 minutes) than in children receiving 0.125% bupivacaine 1ml/kg alone. (341.5±68.23 minutes). Group II children received less number of rescue analgesics than children in Group I in 24 hours period (postoperative).

Authors and Affiliations

Thejeswini .

Keywords

Related Articles

Real-time Ultrasound-guided Catheterisation of the Internal Jugular Vein: A Prospective Comparison with the Landmark Technique

Central venous access has become a mandatory part for clinical management of critically ill patients, both in acute care setting and chronic long term care. However, anatomical landmark guided technique for IJV cannualat...

Comparing Effects of Isoflurane, Sevoflurane and Desflurane, using TEE, on Diastolic Dysfunction of Patients Undergoing CABG

Introduction: Diastolic dysfunction is a cause of morbidity and mortality in patients of coronary artery with normal systolic function. Diastolic dysfunction is highly predictive of adverse events after myocardial infar...

A Prospective Comparative Study of Efficacy and Safety of Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant to Caudal Levobupivacaine Versus Levobupivacaine Alone in Paediatric Patient

Background: As the day care surgery becomes popular, caudal epidural block has become routine intervention in children and infants. But the major limitation with this technique is duration of analgesia after single injec...

USG Guided Femoral Nerve Block for Fracture Femur to Make the Patient Sit Comfortably for Spinal Anaesthesia

Background: Femoral nerve block (FNB) is an option for pain management in patients with femur fractures. Aim: Compare the analgesic effects of femoral nerve block (FNB) with intravenous (IV) fentanyl prior to positioning...

Comparison of 0.375% Bupivacaine in Tranversus Abdominal Plane Block Versus Epidural Block for Post-Operative Analgesia

Epidural analgesia by administration of bupivacaine has been considered as the Gold Standard for management of postoperative pain. On the other hand there is a paucity of literature on the efficacy of bupivacaine adminis...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP472186
  • DOI 10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.4417.52
  • Views 62
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Thejeswini . (2017). Comparision of the Postoperative Analgesic Efficacy of Bupivacaine 0.125% 1ml/kg versus Bupivacaine 0.125% 1ml/kg and Fentanyl 1 µg/kg for Caudal Analgesia in Paediatric Patients undergoing Short Surgical Procedures. Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia, 4(4), 1239-1244. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-472186