Comparative Study of Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine in Lumber Epidural Lower Limb Bypass Surgery
NCT ID: NCT06677697
Last Updated: 2024-11-07
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE4
30 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2021-01-01
2022-11-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Material and method: Sixty(60) patients with American Society of Anaesthesiologists class II/III scheduled for elective lower limb bypass surgeries were randomly allocated into two groups .Group B received 0.5% Bupivacaine, and group R received 0.5% Ropivacaine for epidural anaesthesia at the level of L4 \& L5. The onset of sensory and motor block and adverse events during the peroperative period were noted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
0.25% Bupivacaine Versus a Mixture of 0.25% Bupivacaine and 1.3 % Liposomal Bupivacaine in Patients Undergoing Tka
NCT03303794
Comparing Heavy Levobupivacaine With Enantiomeric Excess of 50% and Heavy Racemic Bupivacaine.
NCT01308047
Isobaric Spinal Ropivacaine Versus Hyperbaric Spinal Bupivacaine in Total Knee Arthroplasty in Geriatric Patients
NCT02764723
Dexmedetomidine Added to Bupivacaine Versus Bupivacaine inTransincisionalU/S Guided Quadratus Lumborum Block in Open Renal Surgeries , A New Technique
NCT03869047
Comparison of Ropivacaine With or Without Fentanyl in Spinal Anaesthesia for Lower Limb Surgeries
NCT04199013
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Epidural anaesthesia has been found to be a well-known technique for lower limb bypass surgeries as it provides effective sensory and motor blockade in an awake patient for longer duration. Moreover, Epidural anaesthesia provides better control of pain and satisfactory analgesia in postoperative period without any respiratory complications. Bupivacaine \& Ropivacaine both are amide local anaesthetics. Bupivacaine being more cardiotoxic there has been paradigm shift to ropivacaine which is less cardiotoxic and widely used in epidural and spinal anaesthesia to obtain intraoperative and postoperative pain relief with lesser side effects. It has been seen that ropivacaine blocks the sensory fibres more effectively as compared to the motor fibre. In addition; ropivacaine has been shown to have vasoconstrictor properties.
Our goal in this prospective, single blind, randomized study was to compare the anaesthetic characteristics of 0.5% Ropivacaine with that of 0.5% Bupivacaine when administered epidurally for lower limb bypass surgery.
Materials \& Methods
This randomized single-blind study was conducted from 1st January '2021 to 31st December '2022 at the department of Anaesthesiology, Ibrahim Cardiac Hospital and Research Institute, Shahbagh, Dhaka, Bangladesh. After institutional ethical committee approval and informed written consent, a total number of 60 adult patients were randomly allocated into two groups (n=30) using a computerized random number table. Patients with ASA physical status II \& III, aged between 30 and 60 years, scheduled for lower limb bypass surgeries were enrolled in this study.
Exclusion criteria included local infection at the site of puncture, patients having any neurological deficit in the lower limb, severe hepatic, respiratory, hematological disorders and known allergy to study drugs.
Group B received 0.5% Bupivacaine, and group R received 0.5% Ropivacaine for Epidural Anaesthesia.
Preoperative assessment included detailed history, physical examination, systemic examination, airway assessment and routine investigations, such as hemoglobin, total blood cell count, differential white blood cell count, platelet count, blood glucose, blood urea and serum creatinine. ECG and X-ray were also performed. Preoperative baseline vital parameters were recorded. Intravenous line was secured with an 18G canula, and infusion was started. Premedication was given with inj. Ondansetron 4 mg iv, inj. Ranitidine 50 mg iv. After skin infiltration with 1% Lidocaine, the epidural space was identified with loss of resistance method at the L4 \& L5 interspace in the midline with a 16-gauge Tuohy needle. With the bevel of the needle directed cranially a catheter was inserted 3-5 cm through the needle, then a 2 ml of test dose of the study drug was given. The patient was then placed supine and a further 12 ml of the study drug was administered over a 3-5 min period. Continuous epidural anaesthesia was maintained by 3-5 ml/h through syringe pump. Sensory and motor block were assessed at 5, 10, 15, 20, 30 minutes after injection, then at 30 minutes interval. Motor block was assessed by Bromage scale, and sensory block was assessed by the blunt end of a 27-gauge needle based on a dermatome chart. Heart rate, blood pressure, SPO2 were recorded every 5 minutes interval per operatively but data were analysis at 5 min, 15 min, 25 min, 35 min, 45 min, 60 min, 90 min, 120 min, 150 min, 180 min, 240 min, 300 min and 360 min interval. The following side effects were observed: nausea, vomiting, respiratory depression, shivering, and episode of hypotension (20% decreases in MAP in relation to baseline values), bradycardia (HR \<50 beats/min), and hypoxemia (SpO2 \<90%). If systolic blood pressure is \<20% from base line or MAP \<60 mmHg, IV ephedrine 5 mg was given incrementally. If the HR is \<50 beats/min, 0.6 mg atropine sulfate was administrated. Other parameters like duration of onset of sensory and motor block were assessed.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group A 30 participant received 0.5% Bupivacaine
Group A 30 participant received 0.5% Bupivacaine
No interventions assigned to this group
Group B 30 participant received 0.5% rupivacaine
Group B 30 participant received 0.5% rupivacaine
Ropivacaine 0,5%
Group B 30 patients recive 0.5% ropivacine
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Ropivacaine 0,5%
Group B 30 patients recive 0.5% ropivacine
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
\-
18 Years
70 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Bangladesh Institute of Research and Rehabilitation in Diabetes, Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
OTHER
ibrahim cardiac hospital and research institute
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Raju Ahmed
Associate Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
raju ahmed
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
ibrahim cardiac resech
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Ibrahim Cardiac Hospital and Research Institute
Dhaka, , Bangladesh
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
ICHRI/res/GA/2020/02
Identifier Type: OTHER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
ICHRI/res/GA/2020/02
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.