Comparison of Postoperative Analgesic Effect of Ropivacaine Hydrochloride with Bupivacaine Hydrochloride in Transversus Abdominis Plane Block after Total Abdominal Hysterectomy

Journal Title: Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia - Year 2018, Vol 5, Issue 10

Abstract

Background and Aims: Total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) is one of the commonly performed major surgical procedures resulting in substantial postoperative pain and discomfort. Hence, the study was carried out to compare the postoperative analgesic effect of Ropivacaine hydrochloride with Bupivacaine hydrochloride in transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block after total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH). The primary objective was to compare the post operative analgesic duration and secondary objective was comparing the hemodynamic parameters, nausea and sedation score. Methods: The Prospective, double blind and randomized comparative trial was conducted in 60 ASA physical status I and II patients scheduled for elective total abdominal hysterectomy. Patients were randomly divided into two group R and group B and they were given TAP block by ‘double pop off ’ technique with Ropivacaine and Bupivacaine respectively. Heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, NRS NRS nausea and sedation score were measured. Data was analysed with Mann Whitney U Test and Chi square test. Results: Haemodynamic variables like heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure does not show significant difference with p value > 0.05. Time for rescue analgesia was significantly higher in patients with group B when compared with group R with p value of < 0.001. Nausea and Sedation score also remains normal without any significant changes with p value > 0.05. Conclusion: Bupivacaine hydrochloride gave longer duration of postoperative analgesia compared with Ropivacaine hydrochloride and there is no significant differences in hemodynamic variables, nausea and sedation score.

Authors and Affiliations

Palanisamy Nithiyanandhan

Keywords

Related Articles

A Study on Combined Spinal Epidural Labour Analgesia a Comparison between 0.125% Bupivacaine with Fentanyl Versus 0.1% Ropivacaine with Fentanyl

Introduction: The responsibility of the Anaesthesiologist in obstetrics is arguably greater than in any other fields of anaesthesia. Aim: To compare the quality of epidural analgesia of 0.125% bupivacaine with 0.1% ropiv...

Comparative Analysis of Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine during Epidural Analgesia

IASP defines pain as “an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage or described in terms of the actual damage.” This definition embraces various concepts especially the...

Evaluation of Low Dose Fentanyl-Midazolam Premedication on Sevoflurane Induction for Ease of LMA Insertion in Adults

Sevoflurane, a halogenated volatile anesthetic agent and premedication with fentanyl and midazolam are both helpful in deepening the plane of anaesthesia. When used in synergism, these can aid in a smooth laryngeal mask...

Spinal Anaesthesia with Midline and Paramedian Technique in Pregnant Patients undergoing Lower Segment Caesarean Section Under Spinal Anaesthesia

Background and AIMS: Subarachnoid blockade is widely used due to its simplicity, low cost and reduced complications due to general anaesthesia. Subarachnoid space can be approached from midline or paramedian approach (PM...

Effects of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine on Bupivacaine Spinal Anaesthesia: A Placebo Controlled Randomised Trial

Endotracheal intubation using an induction agent is usually facilitated by the use of depolarizingBackground: Endotracheal intubation using an induction agent is usually facilitated by the use of depolarizing neuromuscul...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP548525
  • DOI 10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.51018.15
  • Views 46
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Palanisamy Nithiyanandhan (2018). Comparison of Postoperative Analgesic Effect of Ropivacaine Hydrochloride with Bupivacaine Hydrochloride in Transversus Abdominis Plane Block after Total Abdominal Hysterectomy. Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia, 5(10), 1679-1686. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-548525