-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Relative potencies of bupivacaine and ropivacaine for analgesia in labour.
- G Capogna, D Celleno, P Fusco, G Lyons, and M Columb.
- Department of Anaesthesia, Fatebenefratelli General Hospital, Rome, Italy.
- Br J Anaesth. 1999 Mar 1;82(3):371-3.
AbstractWe have used the technique of randomized, double-blind sequential allocation to compare the minimum local analgesic concentrations (MLAC) of epidural bupivacaine and ropivacaine for women in the first stage of labour. The test bolus was 20 ml of local anaesthetic solution. The concentration was determined by the response of the previous woman to a higher or lower concentration of local anaesthetic, according to up-down sequential allocation. Efficacy was assessed using a 100-mm visual analogue pain score (VAPS). The test solution had to achieve a VAPS of 10 mm or less to be judged effective. For bupivacaine, MLAC was 0.093 (95% CI 0.076-0.110)% w/v, and for ropivacaine, 0.156 (95% CI 0.136-0.176)%w/v (P < 0.0001, 95% CI difference 0.036-0.090). The analgesic potency of ropivacaine was 0.60 (0.47-0.75) relative to bupivacaine. Claims for reduced toxicity and motor block must be considered with differences in analgesic potency in mind.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.