TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of the effects of epidural 0.5% bupivacaine and 0.5% levobupivacaine administration on anesthesia quality, side effect incidence, and analgesia requirement times in hip and lower extremity surgery
AU - Kara, Fesih
AU - Kürşad, Hüsnü
AU - Çelik, Mine
AU - Dostbil, Ayşenur
AU - Ince, Ilker
AU - Giren, Ahmet Faruk
AU - Alici, Haci Ahmet
PY - 2013
Y1 - 2013
N2 - Aim: To compare the anesthetic effectiveness of epidural levobupivacaine and bupivacaine without adjuvant medication in patients who were to have elective operations on the lower extremities and hips. Materials and methods: This study was conducted on a total of 70 ASA I-II patients aged between 30 and 70 years, who underwent elective hip and lower extremity operations. The patients that received bupivacaine were assigned to Group B (n = 35) and those that received levobupivacaine to Group L (n = 35). Results: No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of the onset and regression times of the sensory and motor blockade, time to reach dermatomes, initial analgesic requirement time, resolution time of the motor block, patient and surgeon satisfaction, heart rate, noninvasive systolic artery pressure, diastolic artery pressure, mean artery pressure, and peripheral oxygen saturation values (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Levobupivacaine could be a good alternative to bupivacaine in patients administered epidural anesthesia in elective hip and lower extremity operations in terms of hemodynamic parameters, quality of anesthesia and analgesia, patient and surgeon satisfaction, and complications.
AB - Aim: To compare the anesthetic effectiveness of epidural levobupivacaine and bupivacaine without adjuvant medication in patients who were to have elective operations on the lower extremities and hips. Materials and methods: This study was conducted on a total of 70 ASA I-II patients aged between 30 and 70 years, who underwent elective hip and lower extremity operations. The patients that received bupivacaine were assigned to Group B (n = 35) and those that received levobupivacaine to Group L (n = 35). Results: No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of the onset and regression times of the sensory and motor blockade, time to reach dermatomes, initial analgesic requirement time, resolution time of the motor block, patient and surgeon satisfaction, heart rate, noninvasive systolic artery pressure, diastolic artery pressure, mean artery pressure, and peripheral oxygen saturation values (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Levobupivacaine could be a good alternative to bupivacaine in patients administered epidural anesthesia in elective hip and lower extremity operations in terms of hemodynamic parameters, quality of anesthesia and analgesia, patient and surgeon satisfaction, and complications.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880940832&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880940832&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3906/sag-1205-5
DO - 10.3906/sag-1205-5
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84880940832
SN - 1300-0144
VL - 43
SP - 580
EP - 585
JO - Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences
JF - Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences
IS - 4
ER -