Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 68 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Search | Current Issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Copyright form | Subscribe | Advertise | Contacts
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 14  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 406-411

A study to evaluate intrathecal 1% chloroprocaine and 0.5% levobupivacaine in perianal surgeries: A prospective randomized study

Department of Anaesthesiology, Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. S Shruthi
No 793,1st A Main Road, 7th Block, 2nd Phase, Banashankari 3rd Stage, Bengaluru - 560 085, Karnataka
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/aer.AER_2_21

Rights and Permissions

Background: With increasing focus on outpatient care, there has been an increased demand for short-acting spinal anesthetics, facilitating early recovery and mobilization of the patient. Aims: The aim of the study was to compare 1% chloroprocaine, characterized by short latency and short duration with 0.5% levobupivacaine, which has shown to preserve motor function at low concentrations, with recovery from motor block as the primary objective and recovery from sensory block and hemodynamic stability as secondary objectives. Settings and Design: A prospective study to evaluate newer isobaric chloroprocaine and levobupivacaine intrathecally in a cohort of patients using randomization and double blinding. Materials and Methods: Sixty American Society of Anesthesiologist physical status Classes I and II patients undergoing perianal surgeries were randomly divided into Group C (n = 30) receiving intrathecal 1% chloroprocaine 3 mL and Group L (n = 30) receiving 0.5% levobupivacaine 1.5 mL. Patients were assessed for sensory and motor block characteristics, hemodynamic changes, period of analgesia, time for ambulation, and urination. Statistical Analysis: Qualitative data were analyzed using Chi-square test and quantitative data using Independent t-test. Results: There was no significant difference in highest sensory level, onset of motor block, maximum Bromage scale achieved, and hemodynamic changes between the two groups. There was a significant difference in mean Time for Maximum Bromage scale, Time for Sensory regression (Lumbar-L1), Duration of Motor Block (Group C 50.7 ± 5.7 min and Group L 181 ± 27.8 min), Time for rescue Analgesia, Time for 1st void, and Time for ambulation (Group C 88.3 ± 9.1 min and Group L2 06.7 ± 27.2 min) between chloroprocaine and levobupivacaine group. The above duration was shorter in chloroprocaine group than in levobupivacaine group. Conclusion: Thus, chloroprocaine provides good surgical anesthesia and early motor recovery than levobupivacaine and is well suited for day care surgeries.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded7    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal