Author(s)

Gulen Guler, Gokhan Cakir, Ayşe Ulgey, Fatih Ugur, Cihangir Bicer, Isın Gunes, Adem Boyaci

Department of Anesthesiology, Erciyes University, Medical Faculty, Kayseri/Turkey.
Department of Anesthesiology, Erciyes University, Medical Faculty, Kayseri/Turkey..

Purpose: Levobupivacaine showed a lower risk of cardiovascular and central nervous system (CNS) toxicity than bupivacaine which is the most popular local anesthetic agent in obstetric practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical efficacy of levobupivacaine compared with hyperbaric bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia for cesarean section. Methods: 60 pregnant women in ASA I - II group scheduled to have elective cesarean operation were allocated into the study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. The combinations 10 mg levobupivacaine (0.5%) + fentanyl (15 μcg) for Group LF (n = 30) patients, 10 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine (0.5%) + fentanyl (15 μcg) for BF (n = 30) patients were intrathecally administrated a total of 2.3 cc. Sensory and motor block characteristics of the groups were assessed with pinprick and Bromage scale; observed hemodynamic changes and side effects were recorded. Results: The time to reach maximum dermatome for the sensory block, time to regression by two dermatomes and time to regress to T12 dermatome was found to be significantly long in Group BF. It was observed that in Group BF, the evolution of the motor block was faster and lasted longer. Whereas hypotension, bradycardia and nausea were less in Group LF, the need for ephedrine was higher in Group BF (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Since motor block time is shorter, and side effects like hypotension, bradycardia and nausea are less, the combination of levobupivacaine + fentanyl can be a good alternative in cesarean sections.

Spinal Anesthesia; Levobupivacaine; Bupivacaine; Fentanyl; Cesarean Section

G. Guler, G. Cakir, A. Ulgey, F. Ugur, C. Bicer, I. Gunes and A. Boyaci, "A Comparison of Spinal Anesthesia with Levobupivacaine and Hyperbaric Bupivacaine for Cesarean Sections: A Randomized Trial," Open Journal of Anesthesiology, Vol. 2 No. 3, 2012, pp. 84-89. doi: 10.4236/ojanes.2012.23020.