Comparison Of Efficacy Of Hyperbaric Ropivacaine 0.75% With Hyperbaric Levobupivacaine 0.5% In Subjects Undergoing Lower Limb Orthopaedic Surgeries Under Spinal Anaesthesia - A Randomised Control Study

Background: Spinal anaesthesia, also known as a subarachnoid block (SAB), is a specialized technique for achieving regional anaesthesia by administering anaesthetic agents into the cerebrospinal fluid for pain management and muscle relaxation of below-umbilical surgical procedures. While hyperbaric bupivacaine is commonly used, levobupivacaine and ropivacaine are being preferred due to their lower cardio-neuro toxicity as compared to bupivacaine. Objective: This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of hyperbaric Ropivacaine 0.75% and hyperbaric Levobupivacaine 0.5% under spinal anaesthesia for elective orthopaedic lower limb procedures. Method: A randomized study was conducted between two groups of thirty ASA 1 & 2 patients each, aged 18 to 55 years, who underwent lower limb orthopaedic procedures at Adichunchanagiri hospital. Group A received 3cc of intrathecal hyperbaric Ropivacaine 0.75% and Group B received 3cc of intrathecal hyperbaric Levobupivacaine 0.5%. The time of onset and duration of sensory and motor blockade were compared along with intraoperative hemodynamic parameters. Results: The mean time for the onset of sensory and motor blockade was significantly faster in Group B compared to Group A patients (p<.005). The mean time for regression of sensory blockade by two segments from peak sensory level in Group B was higher than in Group A (p<0.05). The mean duration of motor blockade and analgesia in Group B was interpreted to be higher than in Group A (p<0.05). The observations like mean heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure showed statistically significant differences between Group A and Group B. Conclusion: It has been shown that 3cc of intrathecally administered 0.75% hyperbaric ropivacaine and 0.5% hyperbaric levobupivacaine provide clinically acceptable anaesthesia for elective lower limb orthopaedic procedures. Compared to hyperbaric levobupivacaine, hyperbaric ropivacaine shows stable hemodynamic. Group B has an earlier onset of sensory and motor blockade, a longer duration of sensory blockade, motor blockade than Group A, and both have sufficient postoperative analgesia at an equipotent dose.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Environmental Sciences
Published
2025-09-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64252/s2qdmd08
Primary Topic
Anesthesia and Pain Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison Of Efficacy Of Hyperbaric Ropivacaine 0.75% With Hyperbaric Levobupivacaine 0.5% In Subjects Undergoing Lower Limb Orthopaedic Surgeries Under Spinal Anaesthesia - A Randomised Control Study

Chandra Mohan Setty L. N., Prajwal Patel H S, Shravya D S, Rashmi A Baligatti
International Journal of Environmental Sciences
Anesthesia and Pain Management
article

Comparison Of Efficacy Of Hyperbaric Ropivacaine 0.75% With Hyperbaric Levobupivacaine 0.5% In Subjects Undergoing Lower Limb Orthopaedic Surgeries Under Spinal Anaesthesia - A Randomised Control Study

Chandra Mohan Setty L. N., Prajwal Patel H S, Shravya D S, Rashmi A Baligatti
article en

Abstract

Background: Spinal anaesthesia, also known as a subarachnoid block (SAB), is a specialized technique for achieving regional anaesthesia by administering anaesthetic agents into the cerebrospinal fluid for pain management and muscle relaxation of below-umbilical surgical procedures. While hyperbaric bupivacaine is commonly used, levobupivacaine and ropivacaine are being preferred due to their lower cardio-neuro toxicity as compared to bupivacaine. Objective: This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of hyperbaric Ropivacaine 0.75% and hyperbaric Levobupivacaine 0.5% under spinal anaesthesia for elective orthopaedic lower limb procedures. Method: A randomized study was conducted between two groups of thirty ASA 1 & 2 patients each, aged 18 to 55 years, who underwent lower limb orthopaedic procedures at Adichunchanagiri hospital. Group A received 3cc of intrathecal hyperbaric Ropivacaine 0.75% and Group B received 3cc of intrathecal hyperbaric Levobupivacaine 0.5%. The time of onset and duration of sensory and motor blockade were compared along with intraoperative hemodynamic parameters. Results: The mean time for the onset of sensory and motor blockade was significantly faster in Group B compared to Group A patients (p<.005). The mean time for regression of sensory blockade by two segments from peak sensory level in Group B was higher than in Group A (p<0.05). The mean duration of motor blockade and analgesia in Group B was interpreted to be higher than in Group A (p<0.05). The observations like mean heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure showed statistically significant differences between Group A and Group B. Conclusion: It has been shown that 3cc of intrathecally administered 0.75% hyperbaric ropivacaine and 0.5% hyperbaric levobupivacaine provide clinically acceptable anaesthesia for elective lower limb orthopaedic procedures. Compared to hyperbaric levobupivacaine, hyperbaric ropivacaine shows stable hemodynamic. Group B has an earlier onset of sensory and motor blockade, a longer duration of sensory blockade, motor blockade than Group A, and both have sufficient postoperative analgesia at an equipotent dose.

International Journal of Environmental Sciences
Institute of Medical Sciences (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
Anesthesia and Pain Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.