The Combination of Low-Dose Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl for Spinal Anaesthesia in Ambulatory Inguinal Herniorrhaphy

Safety and effectiveness of adding fentanyl or sufentanil to spinal anesthesia: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Spinal infusions of either fentanyl or sufentanil have been reported in international reports, articles, and scientific events worldwide. This study aimed to determine whether intrathecal fentanyl or sufentanil offers safety in mortality and perioperative adverse events.

METHODS

MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, CENTRAL (Cochrane library databases), gray literature, hand-searching, and clinicaltrials.gov were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials with no language, data, or status restrictions were included, comparing the effectiveness and safety of adding spinal lipophilic opioid to local anesthetics (LAs). Data were pooled using the random-effects models or fixed-effect models based on heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The initial search retrieved 4469 records; 3241 records were eligible, and 3152 articles were excluded after reading titles and abstracts, with a high agreement rate (98.6%). After reading the full texts, 76 articles remained. Spinal fentanyl and sufentanil significantly reduced postoperative pain and opioid consumption, increased analgesia and pruritus. Fentanyl, but not sufentanil, significantly reduced both postoperative nausea and vomiting, and postoperative shivering; compared to LAs alone. The analyzed studies did not report any case of in-hospital mortality related to spinal lipophilic opioids. The rate of respiratory depression was 0.7% and 0.8% when spinal fentanyl or sufentanil was added and when it was not, respectively. Episodes of respiratory depression were rare, uneventful, occurred intraoperatively, and were easily manageable.

CONCLUSION

There is moderate to high quality certainty that there is evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of adding lipophilic opioids to LAs in spinal anesthesia.

A comparison of two different doses of morphine added to spinal bupivacaine for inguinal hernia repair

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of two different doses of intrathecal morphine on postoperative analgesia, postoperative first mobilization and urination times and the severity of side effects.

METHODS

After Institutional Ethical Committee approval, 48 ASA I-II patients were enrolled in this randomized double-blinded study. Spinal anesthesia was performed with 0.1mg (Group I, n=22) or 0.4mg (Group II, n=26) ITM in addition to 7.5mg heavy bupivacaine. The first analgesic requirement, first mobilization and voiding times, and postoperative side effects were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 15.0 and p<0.05 was considered as statistically significant. The numeric data were analyzed by the t-test and presented as mean±SD. Categorical data were analyzed with the chi-square test and expressed as number of patients and percentage.

RESULTS

Demographic data were similar among groups. There were no differences related to postoperative pain, first analgesic requirements, and first mobilization and first voiding times. The only difference between two groups was the vomiting incidence. In Group II 23% (n=6) of the patients had vomiting during the first postoperative 24h compared to 0% in Group I (p=0.025).

CONCLUSION

For inguinal hernia repairs, the dose of 0.1mg of ITM provides comparable postoperative analgesia with a dose of 0.4mg, with significantly lower vomiting incidence when combined with low dose heavy bupivacaine.

Comparison of levobupivacaine and levobupivacaine with fentanyl in infraumbilical surgeries under spinal anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

Intrathecal opioids added to low dose local anesthetics in spinal anaesthesia intensifies sensory block without affecting sympathetic blockade. Aim was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intrathecal levobupivacaine plain versus levobupivacaine plus fentanyl in infraumbilical surgeries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a prospective randomized double blind study, 100 patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists grades I and II of either sex, 20-65 years of age were included after approval from the Ethics Committee. Informed consent was taken and patients were randomly divided into two groups of 50 each, to receive either 2 ml of 0.5% isobaric levobupivacaine (group L) or 2 ml of 0.5% isobaric levobupivacaine + 25 μg fentanyl (group LF) intrathecally. Patients were monitored for sensory and motor block characteristics, postoperative analgesia, haemodynamics and side effects and complications for 24 h.

RESULTS

Onset of sensory block and time to maximum sensory block was rapid in group LF (4.8 ± 1.50 and 8.46 ± 1.87 min) as compared to group L (7.6 ± 1.46 and 15.80 ± 2.43 min) (P < 0.000). Maximum sensory block was T6 in group LF and T8 in group L. Maximum Bromage score was 2 in both groups but was achieved earlier in group LF (P < 0.000). Duration of sensory and motor block was significantly prolonged in group LF (270.98 ± 28.60 and 188.52 ± 9.81 min) as compared to group L (197.58 ± 11.20 and 152.76 ± 9.79 min). Total duration of analgesia was also prolonged in group LF (265.16 ± 26.18 min) as compared to group L (168.16 ± 11.08 min). Patients remained haemodynamically stable and side effects and complications were comparable in both groups. Data was analyzed using "Chi-square test" and "unpaired t-test."

CONCLUSION

Addition of fentanyl to levobupivacaine leads to early onset and prolonged duration of sensory and motor block as well as postoperative analgesia with stable haemodynamics and minimal side effects.

[Low-dose levobupivacaine plus fentanyl combination for spinal anesthesia in anorectal surgery]

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of spinal anesthesia using two different doses of fentanyl combined with low-dose levobupivacaine in anorectal surgery.

METHODS

In this prospective, double-blind study, 52 American Society of Anaesthesiologists I-II patients scheduled for elective anorectal surgery were randomized into two groups. The patients in group I received intrathecal 2.5mg hyperbaric levobupivacaine plus 12.5μg fentanyl and in group II received intrathecal 2.5mg hyperbaric levobupivacaine plus 25μg fentanyl. All the patients remained in the seated position for 5min after completion of the spinal anesthesia. Sensory block was evaluated with pin-prick test and motor block was evaluated with a modified Bromage scale.

RESULTS

Motor block was not observed in both of the groups. The sensory block was limited to the S2 level in group I, and S1 level in group II. None of the patients required additional analgesics during the operation. Time to two-segment regression was shorter in group I compared with group II (p<0.01). One patient in group I and 5 patients in group II had pruritus. Hemodynamic parameters were stable during the operation in both of the groups.

CONCLUSION

Spinal saddle block using hyperbaric levobupivacaine with both 12.5μg and 25μg fentanyl provided good quality of anesthesia without motor block for anorectal surgery in the prone position.

Low-dose levobupivacaine plus fentanyl combination for spinal anesthesia in anorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

the aim of this study was to investigate the effects of spinal anesthesia using two different doses of fentanyl combined with low-dose levobupivacaine in anorectal surgery.

METHODS

in this prospective, double-blind study, 52 American Society of Anaesthesiologists I-II patients scheduled for elective anorectal surgery were randomized into two groups. The patients in group I received intrathecal 2.5mg hyperbaric levobupivacaine plus 12.5 μg fentanyl and in group II received intrathecal 2.5mg hyperbaric levobupivacaine plus 25 μg fentanyl. All the patients remained in the seated position for 5 min after completion of the spinal anesthesia. Sensory block was evaluated with pin-prick test and motor block was evaluated with a modified Bromage scale.

RESULTS

motor block was not observed in both of the groups. The sensory block was limited to the S2 level in group I, and S1 level in group II. None of the patients required additional analgesics during the operation. Time to two-segment regression was shorter in group I compared with group II (p<0.01). One patient in group I and 5 patients in group II had pruritus. Hemodynamic parameters were stable during the operation in both of the groups.

CONCLUSION

spinal saddle block using hyperbaric levobupivacaine with both 12.5 μg and 25 μg fentanyl provided good quality of anesthesia without motor block for anorectal surgery in the prone position.

Drug therapy for preventing post-dural puncture headache

BACKGROUND

Post-dural (post-lumbar or post-spinal) puncture headache (PDPH) is one of the most common complications of diagnostic, therapeutic or inadvertent lumbar punctures. Many drug options have been used to prevent headache in clinical practice and have also been tested in some clinical studies, but there are still some uncertainties about their clinical effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of drugs for preventing PDPH in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

The search strategy included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 5), MEDLINE (from 1950 to May 2012), EMBASE (from 1980 to May 2012) and CINAHL (from 1982 to June 2012). There was no language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effectiveness of any drug used for preventing PDPH.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias and extracted data. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes. We calculated a 95% confidence interval (CI) for each RR and MD. We did not undertake meta-analysis because participants' characteristics or assessed doses of drugs were too different in the included studies. We performed an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs (1611 participants) in this review with a majority of women (72%), mostly parturients (women in labour) (913), after a lumbar puncture for regional anaesthesia. Drugs assessed were epidural and spinal morphine, spinal fentanyl, oral caffeine, rectal indomethacin, intravenous cosyntropin, intravenous aminophylline and intravenous dexamethasone.All the included RCTs reported data on the primary outcome, i.e. the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture. Epidural morphine and intravenous cosyntropin reduced the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture when compared to placebo. Also, intravenous aminophylline reduced the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture when compared to no intervention, while intravenous dexamethasone increased it. Spinal morphine increased the number of participants affected by pruritus when compared to placebo, and epidural morphine increased the number of participants affected by nausea and vomiting when compared to placebo. Oral caffeine increased the number of participants affected by insomnia when compared to placebo.The remainder of the interventions analysed did not show any relevant effect for any of the outcomes.None of the included RCTs reported the number of days that patients stayed in hospital.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Morphine and cosyntropin have shown effectiveness for reducing the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture, when compared to placebo, especially in patients with high risk of PDPH, such as obstetric patients who have had an inadvertent dural puncture. Aminophylline also reduced the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture when compared to no intervention in patients undergoing elective caesarean section. Dexamethasone increased the risk of PDPH, after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section, when compared to placebo. Morphine also increased the number of participants affected by adverse events (pruritus and nausea and vomiting)There is a lack of conclusive evidence for the other drugs assessed (fentanyl, caffeine, indomethacin and dexamethasone).These conclusions should be interpreted with caution, owing to the lack of information, to allow correct appraisal of risk of bias and the small sample sizes of studies.

Low-dose ropivacaine or levobupivacaine walking spinal anesthesia in ambulatory inguinal herniorrhaphy

PURPOSE

The purpose of our study was to compare the equipotent doses of ropivacaine and levobupivacaine for walk-out criteria and the characteristics of spinal anesthesia in inguinal herniorrhaphy surgery.

METHODS

Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia was performed. Adult patients were randomly allocated to receive 5 mg 0.5% ropivacaine plus 25 μg fentanyl (group RF, n = 25) or 3.75 mg 0.75% levobupivacaine plus 25 μg fentanyl (group LF, n = 25). Each solution was hypobaric, and the same volume, 3 ml, was administered. Sensory and motor block characteristics, hemodynamic changes, side effects, number of patients having ability to stand and walk at the end of the operation, time to first analgesic requirement, time to urination, time to getting out of bed (ambulation), and time to home discharge were determined.

RESULTS

Sensory block onset time and time to reach the T6 dermatome were significantly shorter in group LF, whereas time to the two-segment regression and time to first analgesic requirement were significantly shorter in group RF. All patients in group LF were Bromage 0. Time to home discharge was shorter in group LF, but this difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that both local anesthetics can be used in walking spinal technique. Levobupivacaine may be an alternative local anesthetic for walking spinal anesthesia as it provides minimum motor block and a long duration of postoperative analgesia, even if its use is not associated with a shorter home discharge time.