Spinal anesthesia for transurethral resection operations: levobupivacaine with or without fentanyl.
O. Cuvas, Hülya Başar, Aydan Yeygel, Esra Türkyilmaz, Melih Sunay
Abstract
O. Cuvas, Hülya Başar, Aydan Yeygel, Esra Türkyilmaz, Melih Sunay
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective ofthe present study was double fold; to compare the characteristics of spinal blocks produced by 0.5% levobupivacaine with and without fentanyl in transurethral resection and to test the hypothesis that, fentanyl added to levobupivacaine, may be used as an alternative to pure levobupivacaine solution, in spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Forty males, aged >60 years, ASA I-III patients scheduled for elective transurethral resection were included in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. Following a spinal tap, intrathecal injection in Group L (n=20), 2.5 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine and in Group LF (n=20), 2.2 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine with fentanyl 15 microg (0.3 mL) was performed. The characteristics of sensory and motor block, hemodynamic data, side effects, patient and surgeon satisfaction were recorded. Patients were observed until the level of sensory block was S1 and the Bromage score was 0. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups forpatient demographic, intraoperative, hemodynamic parameters, side effects and satisfaction. The highest level of sensory block was T9 in the Group L, and T6 in the Group LF (p = 0.001). Duration of motor block was shorter in Group LF than in Group L (291.00 +/- 81.08 min in Group L; 213.75 +/- 59.49 min in Group LF) (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both regimes are effective, and the addition of fentanyl to levobupivacaine may offers the advantage of shorter duration of motor block and may be used as an alternative to pure levobupivacaine solution in spinal anesthesia, for transurethral resections.
OpenAlex reports 30 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
BACKGROUND: The objective ofthe present study was double fold; to compare the characteristics of spinal blocks produced by 0.5% levobupivacaine with and without fentanyl in transurethral resection and to test the hypothesis that, fentanyl added to levobupivacaine, may be used as an alternative to pure levobupivacaine solution, in spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Forty males, aged >60 years, ASA I-III patients scheduled for elective transurethral resection were included in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. Following a spinal tap, intrathecal injection in Group L (n=20), 2.5 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine and in Group LF (n=20), 2.2 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine with fentanyl 15 microg (0.3 mL) was performed. The characteristics of sensory and motor block, hemodynamic data, side effects, patient and surgeon satisfaction were recorded. Patients were observed until the level of sensory block was S1 and the Bromage score was 0. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups forpatient demographic, intraoperative, hemodynamic parameters, side effects and satisfaction. The highest level of sensory block was T9 in the Group L, and T6 in the Group LF (p = 0.001). Duration of motor block was shorter in Group LF than in Group L (291.00 +/- 81.08 min in Group L; 213.75 +/- 59.49 min in Group LF) (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both regimes are effective, and the addition of fentanyl to levobupivacaine may offers the advantage of shorter duration of motor block and may be used as an alternative to pure levobupivacaine solution in spinal anesthesia, for transurethral resections.
Key concepts: Levobupivacaine, Medicine, Fentanyl, Anesthesia, Hemodynamics, Motor block, Spinal anesthesia, Resection