The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology · 2011
Effects of levobupivacaine versus bupivacaine infiltration on postoperative analgesia in pediatric tonsillectomy patients: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ozmen Süay, Ozmen Omer Afşin, Kasapoglu Fikret
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: We compared the effects of levobupivacaine hydrochloride, bupivacaine hydrochloride, and saline injections in alleviating posttonsillectomy pain.
METHODS: Between November 2009 and April 2010, we recruited 60 patients (36 male and 24 female) between 2 and 12 years of age into the study. After informed consent was obtained from the parents, patients admitted for tonsillectomy were randomized into 3 groups by means of sealed envelopes. Group 1 (20 patients; mean age, 6.45+/-2.78 years) received 0.9% sodium chloride (saline solution), group 2 (20 patients; mean age, 5.60+/-2.70 years) received 0.25% levobupivacaine hydrochloride, and group 3 (20 patients; mean age, 5.85+/-2.43 years) received 0.5% bupivacaine hydrochloride infiltrated around each tonsil. Pain was evaluated with McGrath's face scale.
RESULTS: The postoperative pain scores at 1 and 5 hours were similar among the groups (p>0.05). The pain scores in the levobupivacaine group were lower than those in the saline group at 13 hours (p<0.017). The pain scores in the bupivacaine and levobupivacaine groups were significantly lower than those in the saline group from 17 to 21 hours until day 6 (p>0.017). There was no difference between the levobupivacaine and bupivacaine groups (p>0.017).
CONCLUSIONS: Local infiltration of levobupivacaine is a relatively safe and effective method and is equivalent to use of bupivacaine for posttonsillectomy pain.
METHODS: Between November 2009 and April 2010, we recruited 60 patients (36 male and 24 female) between 2 and 12 years of age into the study. After informed consent was obtained from the parents, patients admitted for tonsillectomy were randomized into 3 groups by means of sealed envelopes. Group 1 (20 patients; mean age, 6.45+/-2.78 years) received 0.9% sodium chloride (saline solution), group 2 (20 patients; mean age, 5.60+/-2.70 years) received 0.25% levobupivacaine hydrochloride, and group 3 (20 patients; mean age, 5.85+/-2.43 years) received 0.5% bupivacaine hydrochloride infiltrated around each tonsil. Pain was evaluated with McGrath's face scale.
RESULTS: The postoperative pain scores at 1 and 5 hours were similar among the groups (p>0.05). The pain scores in the levobupivacaine group were lower than those in the saline group at 13 hours (p<0.017). The pain scores in the bupivacaine and levobupivacaine groups were significantly lower than those in the saline group from 17 to 21 hours until day 6 (p>0.017). There was no difference between the levobupivacaine and bupivacaine groups (p>0.017).
CONCLUSIONS: Local infiltration of levobupivacaine is a relatively safe and effective method and is equivalent to use of bupivacaine for posttonsillectomy pain.