Spinal Anesthesia for Transurethral Resection of Prostate: Levobupivacaine with or without Fentanyl

  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: The aim of the present study was to compare the characteristics of spinal blocks produced by low dose\rlevobupivacaine (0.5%) and compare it when combined with fentanyl in transurethral resection of prostate.\rMethods: With Institutional ethical committee clearance a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study conducted. After\robtaining informed written consent a total of 140 patients scheduled for elective TURP were randomly allocated into one\rof the two groups of 70 patients each. Following a spinal tap, patients in Levobupivacaine Group(L) received 1.5 ml of\r0.5% isobaric levobupivacaine and in Levobupivacaine - Fentanyl Group (LF) received 1 ml of 0.5% isobaric levobupivacaine\rwith fentanyl 25 μg (0.5 ml) intrathecally. The characteristics of sensory and motor block, hemodynamic data, side\reffects, patient and surgeon satisfaction were recorded.\rResults: There were no significant differences between the two groups for patient demographic, intraoperative hemodynamic\rparameters, side effects and satisfaction. The highest level of sensory block was T9 in the Group L, and T8 in the\rGroup LF (p = 0.001). Duration of motor block was shorter in Group LF than in Group L (154.76 ± 16.39 minutes in\rGroup L; 136.23 ± 9.06 minutes in Group LF) (p = 0.001).\rConclusion: Both regimes are effective, and the addition of fentanyl to levobupivacaine may offers prolong duration of\rsensory block and postoperative analgesia and the advantage of shorter duration of motor block, thus it may be used as an\ralternative to pure levobupivacaine solution in spinal anaesthesia, for transurethral resections.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

F, M., Jain, T., & Ojha, P. K. (2016). Spinal Anesthesia for Transurethral Resection of Prostate: Levobupivacaine with or without Fentanyl. International Journal of Anesthesiology & Research, 358–362. https://doi.org/10.19070/2332-2780-1600074

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free