Bupivacaína 0,15% hipobárica versus lidocaína 0,6% hipobárica para raquianestesia posterior em cirurgia anorretal ambulatorial

Luiz Eduardo Imbelloni; Marildo A Gouveia; José Antonio Cordeiro

doi:10.1590/S0034-70942010000200002

Artigo Científico

Bupivacaína 0,15% hipobárica versus lidocaína 0,6% hipobárica para raquianestesia posterior em cirurgia anorretal ambulatorial

Hypobaric 0.15% bupivacaine versus hypobaric 0.6% lidocaine for posterior spinal anesthesia in outpatient anorectal surgery

Luiz Eduardo Imbelloni; Marildo A Gouveia; José Antonio Cordeiro

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-70942010000200002 Braz J Anesthesiol, vol.60, n2, p.113-117, 2010

PDF

Downloads: 0

Resumo

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Baixas doses de bupivacaína e lidocaína têm sido usadas para raquianestesia em cirurgia ambulatorial. O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar a bupivacaína com a lidocaína ambas em solução hipobárica em pacientes ambulatoriais de cirurgia anorretal. MÉTODO: Dois grupos de 75 pacientes, estado físico ASA I-II, candidatos a cirurgia anorretal em posição de canivete, receberam 3 mL (4,5 mg) de bupivacaína 0,15% hipobárica ou 3 mL (18 mg) de lidocaína 0,6% hipobárica. Foram comparados a seletividade do bloqueio, a qualidade da analgesia cirúrgica, a intensidade do bloqueio motor e o tempo de recuperação no paciente de cirurgia ambulatorial. Após a alta foi mantida comunicação diária por telefone até o 3º dia e depois no 30º de pós-operatório. RESULTADOS: O bloqueio foi adequado para cirurgia em todos os pacientes. O nível médio da dispersão cefálica foi L1 com variação de T10-L3 com a bupivacaína e L1 com variação T11-L2 com a lidocaína. Não foi observado bloqueio motor em 135 pacientes (65 da bupivacaína x 70 da lidocaína). Hipotensão e bradicardia não foram observadas em nenhum paciente. A média de duração do bloqueio sensitivo foi de 99,1 (11,0) minutos com a bupivacaína e 64,1 (7,6) minutos com a lidocaína, com diferença significante (p < 0,0005). Cefaleia pós-punção lombar não ocorreu em nenhum paciente. CONCLUSÕES: Bupivacaína ou lidocaína em solução hipobárica promove predominantemente bloqueio sensitivo após injeção subaracnóidea na posição de canivete. A solução de lidocaína hipobárica proporciona analgesia com a mesma dispersão da bupivacaína, porém com menor duração. As maiores vantagens incluem estabilidade hemodinâmica e ausência de bloqueio motor.

Palavras-chave

ANESTESIA, ANESTÉSICO, Local, CIRURGIA, Proctológica, TÉCNICAS ANESTÉSICAS, Regional

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Low doses of bupivacaine and lidocaine have been used for spinal anesthesia in outpatient surgery. The objective of this study was to compare hypobaric solutions of bupivacaine and lidocaine in outpatient anorectal surgery. METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients, divided in two groups, physical status ASA I-II, scheduled for anorectal surgery in the jackknife position received 3 mL (4.5 mg) of hypobaric 0.15% bupivacaine or 3 mL (18 mg) of hypobaric 0.6% lidocaine. The selectivity of the blockade, quality of surgical anesthesia, intensity of the motor blockade, and time for patient recovery were compared. After patients were discharged, daily phone contact was maintained for three days and on the 30th postoperative day. RESULTS: Adequate surgical blockade was achieved in all patients. The mean level of cephalad dispersion was L1, ranging from T10-L3, with bupivacaine, and L1, ranging from T11-L2, with lidocaine. Motor blockade was not observed in 135 patients (65 in the bupivacaine group x 70 in the lidocaine group). None of the patients developed hypotension and bradycardia. The sensorial blockade had a mean duration of 99.1 (11.0) minutes, with bupivacaine, and 64.1 (7.6) minutes, with lidocaine (p < 0.0005). Post-lumbar puncture headache was not observed in any patient. CONCLUSIONS: Hypobaric solution of bupivacaine or lidocaine promotes, predominantly, sensorial blockade after subarachnoid injection in patients in the jackknife position. Hypobaric lidocaine provides analgesia with the same dispersion of that of bupivacaine, but with shorter duration. Hemodynamic stability and the absence of motor blockade represent the major advantages.

Keywords

ANESTHESIA, ANESTHETIC, Local, ANESTHETIC TECHNIQUE, Regional, SURGERY, Anorectal

Referências

Dahl V, Raeder J. Regional anaesthesia in ambulatory surgery. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2003;16:471-476.

Vaghadia H, McLeod DH, Mitchell GWE. Small-dose hypobaric lidocaine-fentanyl spinal anesthesia for short duration outpatient laparoscopy: I. A randomized comparison with conventional dose hyperbaric lidocaine. Anesth Analg. 1997;84:59-64.

Pavlin DJ, Rapp SE, Polissar NL. Factors affecting discharge time in adult outpatients. Anesth Analg. 1998;87:816-826.

Vaghadia H, Viskari D, Mitchell GWE. Selective spinal anesthesia for outpatient laparoscopy: I: Characteristics of three hypobaric solutions. Can J Anaesth. 2001;48:256-260.

Vaghadia H. Spinal anaesthesia for outpatients: controversies and new techniques. Can J Anaesth. 1998;45:R64-R70.

Imbelloni LE, Gouveia MA, Cordeiro JA. Low dose of lidocaine: comparison of 15 with 20 mg/ml with dextrose for spinal anesthesia in lithotomy position and ambulatory surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2008;52:856-861.

Bodily MN, Carpenter RL, Owens BD. Lidocaine 0.5% spinal anaesthesia: a hypobaric solution for short-stay perirectal surgery. Can J Anaesth. 1992;39:770-773.

Imbelloni LE, Vieira EM, Gouveia MA. Hypobaric 0.15% bupivacaine versus hyperbaric 0.5% bupivacaine for posterior (dorsal) spinal block in outpatient anorectal surgery. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2006;56:571-582.

Maroof M, Khan RM, Siddique M. Hypobaric spinal anaesthesia with bupivacaine (0.1%) gives selective sensory block for ano-rectal surgery. Can J Anaesth. 1995;42:691-694.

Imbelloni LE, Carneiro AN, Sobral MGC. Anestesia subaracnóidea isobárica com lidocaína 2%: Efeitos de diferentes volumes. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 1992;42:131-135.

Kahn CH, Blank JW, Warfield CA. Lumbar Spinal Nerve Root. Regional Anesthesia: An atlas of anatomy and techniques. 1996:285-294.

Prasad ML, Abcarian H. Urinary retention following operations for benign anorectal diseases. Dis Colon Rectum. 1978;21:490-492.

Gottesman L, Milsom JW, Mazier P. The use of anxiolytic and parasympathomimetic agents in the treatment of postoperative urinary retention following anorectal surgery: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Dis Colon Rectum. 1989;32:867-870.

Kamphuis ET, Ionescu TR, Kuipers PWG. Recovery of storage and emptying functions of the urinary bladder after spinal anesthesia with lidocaine and with bupivacaine in men. Anesthesiology. 1998;88:310-316.

Liam BL, Yim CF, Chong JL. Dose response study of lidocaine 1% for spinal anaesthesia for lower limb and perineal surgery. Can J Anaesth. 1998;45:645-650.

Bodily MN, Carpenter RL, Owens BD. Lidocaine 0.5% spinal anaesthesia: a hypobaric solution for short-stay perirectal surgery. Can J Anaesth. 1992;39:770-773.

Casati A, Fanelli G, Aldegheri G. Frequency of hypotension during conventional or asymmetric hyperbaric spinal block. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999;24:214-219.

Ben-David B, Maryanovsky M, Gurevitch A. A comparison of minidose lidocaine-fentanyl and conventional-dose lidocaine spinal anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2000;91:865-870.

Cuvas O, Gulec H, Karaaslan M. The use of low dose plain solutions of local anaesthetic agents for spinal anaesthesia in the prone position: bupivacaine compared with levobupivacaine. Anesthesia. 2009;64:14-18.

Bupivacaína 0,15% hipobárica versus lidocaína 0,6% hipobárica para raquianestesia posterior em cirurgia anorretal ambulatorial

Hypobaric 0.15% bupivacaine versus hypobaric 0.6% lidocaine for posterior spinal anesthesia in outpatient anorectal surgery

Luiz Eduardo Imbelloni; Marildo A Gouveia; José Antonio Cordeiro

Resumo

Palavras-chave

Abstract

Keywords

Referências

Links

Compartilhar

Braz J Anesthesiol