Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2004 Sep;99(3):713-717.
doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000129976.26455.32.

A comparison of intrathecal plain solutions containing ropivacaine 20 or 15 mg versus bupivacaine 10 mg

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

A comparison of intrathecal plain solutions containing ropivacaine 20 or 15 mg versus bupivacaine 10 mg

Helena Kallio et al. Anesth Analg. 2004 Sep.

Abstract

Ropivacaine, which blocks sensory nerve fibers more readily than motor fibers, is considered to be less potent than bupivacaine. Our hypothesis was that, when used in spinal anesthesia for day surgery, ropivacaine 15 and 20 mg would provide faster motor recovery than bupivacaine 10 mg. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study included 90 ambulatory lower-extremity surgery patients who received 2 mL of ropivacaine 1%, ropivacaine 0.75%, or bupivacaine 0.5%. Motor block was tested with the Bromage scale, and sensory block was tested with pinprick. Ropivacaine 15 mg provided faster recovery of motor block (150 min) than did bupivacaine 10 mg (210 min; P = 0.005), but the median duration of sensory block at T10 (140 min) did not differ significantly from that with bupivacaine 10 mg (140 min). The median duration of sensory block at T10 was significantly longer with ropivacaine 20 mg (170 min) than with bupivacaine 10 mg (140 min; P = 0.005), but the median recovery from motor block (210 min) did not differ significantly. We conclude that the duration of sensory block of ropivacaine was two thirds and the duration of motor block was half when compared with bupivacaine, with calculations based on the duration-per-milligram of the local anesthetic.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Rosenberg PH, Heinonen E. Different sensitivity of A and C fibres to long-acting amide local anaesthetics. Br J Anaesth 1983;55:163–7.
    1. Bader AM, Datta S, Flanagan H, Covino BG. Comparison of bupivacaine- and ropivacaine-induced conduction blockade in the isolated rabbit vagus nerve. Anesth Analg 1989;68:724–7.
    1. McDonald SB, Liu SS, Kopacz DJ, Stephenson CA. Hyperbaric spinal ropivacaine: a comparison to bupivacaine in volunteers. Anesthesiology 1999;90:971–7.
    1. Gautier PE, De Kock M, Van Steenberge A, et al. Intrathecal ropivacaine for ambulatory surgery: a comparison between in-trathecal bupivacaine and intrathecal ropivacaine for knee arthroscopy. Anesthesiology 1999;91:1239–45.
    1. Logan MR, McClure JH, Wildsmith JA. Plain bupivacaine: an unpredictable spinal anaesthetic agent. Br J Anaesth 1986;58:292–6.

LinkOut - more resources