Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Introduction Recent evidence has questioned the advantage of local anesthetic (LA) combinations. This study tested the hypothesis that mixing rapid-onset (lidocaine) and long-duration (bupivacaine) LA would provide faster onset of complete conduction blockade (CCB) compared with bupivacaine alone and longer duration of analgesia compared with lidocaine alone during low-volume (20 mL) ultrasound-guided (USG) supraclavicular brachial plexus block (SCBPB).
Methods Sixty-three patients receiving USG-SCBPB were randomly allocated into: group L: 20 mL 2% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:200 000; group B: 20 mL 0.5% bupivacaine; group LB: 20 mL of equi-volume mixture of both drugs. Sensory and motor blockade was recorded on a three point sensory and motor assessment scale at 10 min intervals for up to 40 min and the total composite score (TCS) at each time point was determined. The duration of analgesia was also noted.
Results The mean time to CCB of group LB (16±7 min) was comparable (p>0.05) with group L (14±6 min) and group B (21±8 min) in patients who were attained CCB. However, the proportion of patients attaining complete conduction block (TCS=16/16) was significantly lower (p=0.0001) in group B (48%) when compared with group L (95%) and group LB (95%) at the end of 40 min. The median (IQR) duration of postoperative analgesia was longest in group B; 12.2 (12–14.5) hours, followed by group LB 8.3 (7–11) hours and 4 (2.7–4.5) hours in group L.
Conclusion At 20 mL LA volume, equal mixture of lidocaine and bupivacaine provided significantly faster onset of CCB compared with bupivacaine alone and longer duration of postoperative analgesia compared with lidocaine alone but shorter than bupivacaine alone during low-volume USG-SCBPB.
Trial registration number CTRI/2020/11/029359.
- analgesia
- REGIONAL ANESTHESIA
- Brachial Plexus
- Lower Extremity
- Upper Extremity
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request.
Footnotes
Contributors SR—study design, block performer, data analysis, manuscript writing and editing. ST—guarantor, study design, block performer, data analysis, manuscript writing and editing. DR—data collection, manuscript editing, PS—manuscript writing and editing.
Funding This research work was locally funded by the Department of Anaesthesiology, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Pondicherry.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.