Comparison of 5 Mg (1 Ml) And 4 Mg (0.8 Ml) 0.5% Hyperbaric Bupivacaine with 25 Microgms Fentanyl in CSE Technique for Caesarean Section- A RCT

Abstract

Background and Objectives Patients undergoing caesarean section in spinal anaesthesia are at greater risk of hypotension than those not undergoing-caesarean section. In addition to aortocaval compression, the total dose of local anaesthetic drug used in subarachnoid block also plays an important role in determining the magnitude of arterial hypotension. The combination of reduced dose of local anaesthetics with intrathecal opioids makes it possible to achieve adequate spinal anaesthesia with minimum hypotension. The use of a lower dose aims to decrease maternal and foetal side-effects (hypotension, intraoperative nausea/vomiting). Intrathecal opioid improves the quality of analgesia and reduces local anaesthetic requirements with favourable effects on haemodynamic stability. In this study we have compared two low doses of bupivacaine with Fentanyl as additive for subarachnoid block in CSE for caesarean section. Methods: The study was carried out on 60 patients, 30 patients received subarachnoid 4mg(0.8 ml) of 0.5% hyperbaric bupvacaine with 25 microgms fentanyl (Group A) and 30 patients received Subarachnoid 5 mg(1 ml) of 0.5% hyperbaric bupvacaine with 25 microgms fentanyl (Group B) as a part of CSE technique for LSCS and hemodynamics and adequacy of anaethesia compared. Result: Spinal block provided excellent surgical anaesthesia in all patients. The mean time to reach T6 sensory level in both the groups was similar. Less patients in group A had hypotensive episodes as compared to group B (3 out of 30 versus 7 out of 30). Onset of sensory block till T6 as well as grade of motor block was comparable. Conclusions: We conclude that 4 mg of 0.5 % hyperbaric bupivacaine with 25 mcg fentanyl had better hemodynamic stability as compared to 5 mg of 0.5 % hyperbaric bupivacaine with 25 mcg fentanyl. It was also associated with good sensory and motor blockade.

Authors and Affiliations

Dr. Ankur Dixit

Keywords

Related Articles

An Epidemiological Study on Topical Steroid Misuse in Various Dermatoses.

Background: Topical corticosteroids, being one of the most frequently prescribed classes of drugs in clinical practice today, are very often subjected to misuse. A vast majority of the patients are unaware of the untowar...

Accuracy of Dental Age Estimation Using Demirjian's Eight-Teeth Method And Acharya’s Indian Formula In Central Kerala Population

Background Age estimation is made possible by a variety of dental techniques, amongst which the radiological methods are more popular. The Demirjian's technique of age assessment based on tooth development stages has bee...

To Evaluate Excess Anteversion In Patients With Avascular Necrosis Of Hip Treated With Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Background :Normal femoral anteversion contributes to stability of hip, maintaining normal femoral version in association with acetabular version allows the hip stability and unimpeded functional range of motion. The aim...

Markers of Ovarian Function: Anti-Mullerian Hormone (Amh) Vs. Others

Aim: the aim of this study is to determine day 3 serum AMH, FSH, LH, Estradiol (E2), Inhibin B levels, ovarian volume and antral follicle count to assess ovarian function. Methods: The study was conducted on 130 infertil...

Effect Of Ergonomic Education And Training On Self Reported Musculoskeletal Pain, Workstation Habits And Psychological Wellbeing In Computer Users.

Technological advances, peculiarly, invention of computers, have revolutionized the way of our working. Computers have now become an integral part of our life. However, its use is not at all free from health hazards.[1]...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP619951
  • DOI -
  • Views 64
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Dr. Ankur Dixit (2019). Comparison of 5 Mg (1 Ml) And 4 Mg (0.8 Ml) 0.5% Hyperbaric Bupivacaine with 25 Microgms Fentanyl in CSE Technique for Caesarean Section- A RCT. International Journal of Medical Science and Innovative Research (IJMSIR), 4(7), 76-86. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-619951