Effect of different volumes of bupivacaine 0.25% caudal blocks on cardiac index measured by electrical cardiometry in children undergoing elective lower abdominal surgeries: A randomised controlled trial.

IF 2.9 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-17 DOI:10.4103/ija.ija_858_24
Khaled Sarhan, Maha Gebreel, Ashgan Raouf, Islam Reda, Mohammed Ameen, Rana Walaa, Nazmy Seif
{"title":"Effect of different volumes of bupivacaine 0.25% caudal blocks on cardiac index measured by electrical cardiometry in children undergoing elective lower abdominal surgeries: A randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Khaled Sarhan, Maha Gebreel, Ashgan Raouf, Islam Reda, Mohammed Ameen, Rana Walaa, Nazmy Seif","doi":"10.4103/ija.ija_858_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Studies assessing caudal block's effects on children's cardiac output are scarce. We aimed to estimate the effects of the caudal block using different volumes of plain bupivacaine 0.25% on the cardiac index assessed by electrical cardiometry.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Children aged 1-8 years undergoing minor lower abdominal surgeries were randomly assigned to one of three equal groups: The 0.8 group received general anaesthesia (GA) along with caudal block with 0.8 mL/kg of bupivacaine 0.25%, the 1.2 group received GA along with caudal block with 1.2 mL/kg of bupivacaine 0.25%, and the control group received GA only. The primary outcome was the percentage of change in the cardiac index from the baseline 10 minutes after the caudal block. Continuous variables were analysed using the ANOVA test, while categorical data was analysed using a chi-squared test with the significance level set at <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean percentage of change of cardiac index from baseline 10 minutes after caudal block was significantly lower in the 0.8 and 1.2 groups (-11.4 (standard deviation (SD): 12.5%) and -17.1 (SD: 15.5%), respectively) compared to the control group (-0.7 (SD: 11.5%), (<i>P</i> = 0.007 and <i>P</i> = 0.0001). Mean differences were -11 (0.8 vs control, 95% confidence interval (CI): -18.7, -3.3%, and -15.2 (1.2 vs control, 95% CI: -23, -7.5%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The cardiac index progressively decreased with the increase in the volume of the caudal block with plain bupivacaine at 0.25% compared to the baseline. However, this decrease was not clinically significant, suggesting that the cardiac index remained within an acceptable range after the caudal block. Nevertheless, caution is warranted due to the increased incidence of hypotension with increasing volumes of plain local anaesthetics in the caudal block.</p>","PeriodicalId":13339,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"69 3","pages":"275-281"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11952167/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_858_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: Studies assessing caudal block's effects on children's cardiac output are scarce. We aimed to estimate the effects of the caudal block using different volumes of plain bupivacaine 0.25% on the cardiac index assessed by electrical cardiometry.

Methods: Children aged 1-8 years undergoing minor lower abdominal surgeries were randomly assigned to one of three equal groups: The 0.8 group received general anaesthesia (GA) along with caudal block with 0.8 mL/kg of bupivacaine 0.25%, the 1.2 group received GA along with caudal block with 1.2 mL/kg of bupivacaine 0.25%, and the control group received GA only. The primary outcome was the percentage of change in the cardiac index from the baseline 10 minutes after the caudal block. Continuous variables were analysed using the ANOVA test, while categorical data was analysed using a chi-squared test with the significance level set at P < 0.05.

Results: The mean percentage of change of cardiac index from baseline 10 minutes after caudal block was significantly lower in the 0.8 and 1.2 groups (-11.4 (standard deviation (SD): 12.5%) and -17.1 (SD: 15.5%), respectively) compared to the control group (-0.7 (SD: 11.5%), (P = 0.007 and P = 0.0001). Mean differences were -11 (0.8 vs control, 95% confidence interval (CI): -18.7, -3.3%, and -15.2 (1.2 vs control, 95% CI: -23, -7.5%).

Conclusion: The cardiac index progressively decreased with the increase in the volume of the caudal block with plain bupivacaine at 0.25% compared to the baseline. However, this decrease was not clinically significant, suggesting that the cardiac index remained within an acceptable range after the caudal block. Nevertheless, caution is warranted due to the increased incidence of hypotension with increasing volumes of plain local anaesthetics in the caudal block.

不同剂量0.25%布比卡因尾侧阻滞对选择性下腹手术儿童心电测量心脏指数的影响:一项随机对照试验
背景和目的:评估尾侧阻滞对儿童心输出量影响的研究很少。我们的目的是评估使用不同体积0.25%的布比卡因对心电测量评估的心脏指数的尾侧阻滞的影响。方法:1 ~ 8岁接受下腹部小手术的儿童随机分为3组:0.8组全麻加0.25%布比卡因0.8 mL/kg尾侧阻滞,1.2组全麻加0.25%布比卡因1.2 mL/kg尾侧阻滞,对照组仅全麻。主要结局是在尾侧阻滞后10分钟心脏指数从基线变化的百分比。连续变量分析采用方差分析检验,分类数据分析采用卡方检验,显著性水平设置为P < 0.05。结果:与对照组(-0.7 (SD: 11.5%)相比,0.8组和1.2组在尾动脉阻滞后10分钟心脏指数的平均变化百分比(分别为-11.4(标准差:12.5%)和-17.1(标准差:15.5%)显著低于对照组(P = 0.007和P = 0.0001)。平均差异为-11 (0.8 vs对照组,95%置信区间(CI): -18.7, -3.3%和-15.2 (1.2 vs对照组,95% CI: -23, -7.5%)。结论:与基线相比,随着布比卡因尾侧阻滞容量的增加,心脏指数逐渐降低(0.25%)。然而,这种下降在临床上并不显著,这表明在尾侧阻滞后心脏指数仍在可接受的范围内。然而,由于在尾侧阻滞中增加普通局部麻醉剂量会增加低血压的发生率,因此需要谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
44.80%
发文量
210
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信