A Randomized Controlled Trial: Comparison of 4% Articaine versus 0.5% Bupivacaine for Ambulatory Orthopedic Surgery under Supraclavicular Block.

IF 1.6 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Anesthesiology Research and Practice Pub Date : 2020-09-24 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2020/2194873
Simon H Armanious, Gamal A Abdelhameed
{"title":"A Randomized Controlled Trial: Comparison of 4% Articaine versus 0.5% Bupivacaine for Ambulatory Orthopedic Surgery under Supraclavicular Block.","authors":"Simon H Armanious, Gamal A Abdelhameed","doi":"10.1155/2020/2194873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Articaine has been used in many dental and ophthalmic outpatient procedures. In the era of ultrasound-guided regional techniques, we searched for short and potent local anesthetic for patients undergoing ambulatory upper limb procedures. However, studies about articaine efficacy in brachial plexus block are limited. In this study, we compared its safety and efficacy against bupivacaine as a commonly used anesthetic agent for ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This randomized prospective study was performed at Ain Shams University Hospital from January to March 2020. A total of 117 patients aged 20 to 60 years, with the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II, were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups: in group A, patients received 30 ml articaine 2%, and in group B, patients received 30 ml of bupivacaine 0.5%. We measured motor and sensory block duration as a primary outcome. Other secondary outcomes such as onset of block, duration of analgesia, patient satisfaction, and time to home discharge readiness were also measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed data collected from 97 patients. The motor block duration was significantly shorter in group A (165.73 ± 20.33 min) than in group B (220.27 ± 37.73 min). The onset of motor block was faster in group A (8.73 ± 4.33 min), and the postoperative VAS score was lower in group B. Patients in group A achieved an earlier home discharge of 289.67 ± 2.73 min.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Earlier resolution of articaine block makes it more favorable than bupivacaine for ambulatory surgery. This trial is registered with (NCT04189198).</p>","PeriodicalId":7834,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesiology Research and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7532365/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesiology Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2194873","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Articaine has been used in many dental and ophthalmic outpatient procedures. In the era of ultrasound-guided regional techniques, we searched for short and potent local anesthetic for patients undergoing ambulatory upper limb procedures. However, studies about articaine efficacy in brachial plexus block are limited. In this study, we compared its safety and efficacy against bupivacaine as a commonly used anesthetic agent for ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block.

Methods: This randomized prospective study was performed at Ain Shams University Hospital from January to March 2020. A total of 117 patients aged 20 to 60 years, with the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II, were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups: in group A, patients received 30 ml articaine 2%, and in group B, patients received 30 ml of bupivacaine 0.5%. We measured motor and sensory block duration as a primary outcome. Other secondary outcomes such as onset of block, duration of analgesia, patient satisfaction, and time to home discharge readiness were also measured.

Results: We analyzed data collected from 97 patients. The motor block duration was significantly shorter in group A (165.73 ± 20.33 min) than in group B (220.27 ± 37.73 min). The onset of motor block was faster in group A (8.73 ± 4.33 min), and the postoperative VAS score was lower in group B. Patients in group A achieved an earlier home discharge of 289.67 ± 2.73 min.

Conclusion: Earlier resolution of articaine block makes it more favorable than bupivacaine for ambulatory surgery. This trial is registered with (NCT04189198).

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

随机对照试验:4% 阿替卡因与 0.5% 布比卡因在锁骨上阻滞的非卧床骨科手术中的比较。
背景:阿替卡因已在许多牙科和眼科门诊手术中使用。在采用超声引导区域技术的时代,我们正在为接受非卧床上肢手术的患者寻找短效、强效的局麻药。然而,有关臂丛神经阻滞中阿替卡因疗效的研究非常有限。在这项研究中,我们比较了阿替卡因与布比卡因作为超声引导下锁骨上臂丛阻滞常用麻醉剂的安全性和有效性:这项随机前瞻性研究于 2020 年 1 月至 3 月在艾因夏姆斯大学医院进行。共有 117 名年龄在 20 岁至 60 岁之间、美国麻醉医师协会身体状况为 I 级和 II 级的患者参与了这项研究。患者被随机分为两组:A 组患者接受 30 毫升 2% 阿替卡因,B 组患者接受 30 毫升 0.5% 布比卡因。我们测量了运动和感觉阻滞持续时间,并将其作为主要结果。我们还测量了其他次要结果,如阻滞开始时间、镇痛持续时间、患者满意度和出院准备时间:我们分析了 97 名患者的数据。A 组的运动阻滞持续时间(165.73 ± 20.33 分钟)明显短于 B 组(220.27 ± 37.73 分钟)。A 组患者的运动阻滞开始时间更快(8.73±4.33 分钟),B 组患者的术后 VAS 评分更低;A 组患者的出院时间更早(289.67±2.73 分钟):结论:与布比卡因相比,阿替卡因阻滞的提前解除更有利于非卧床手术。该试验已在 (NCT04189198) 上注册。
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
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
18 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