A CLINICAL COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SCALP BLOCK WITH 0.5% BUPIVACAINE VERSUS LEVOBUPIVACAINE 0.5% FOR MAYFIELD INSERTION ON HAEMODYNAMIC RESPONSE AND EFFICACIES OF POSTOPERATIVE ANALGESIA

KALAPALA RAMESH; BANDRAPALLI EMEEMA; K. INDIRA PRIYADARSHINI; CHANDRASEKHAR VALLEPALLI; MADHULIKA YELURU

doi:10.22159/ijcpr.2024v16i3.4089

Authors

KALAPALA RAMESH Department of Anaesthesiology, Government Medical College and General Hospital, Madanapalle-517325, Andhra Pradesh, India
BANDRAPALLI EMEEMA Department of Anaesthesiology, Guntur Medical College and Government General Hospital, Guntur-522001, Andhra Pradesh, India
K. INDIRA PRIYADARSHINI Department of Anaesthesiology, Guntur Medical College and Government General Hospital, Guntur-522001, Andhra Pradesh, India
CHANDRASEKHAR VALLEPALLI Department of Community Medicine, SVIMS Sri Padmavathi Medical College for Women, Tirupathi, Andhra Pradesh, India
MADHULIKA YELURU Mother Hospital, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ijcpr.2024v16i3.4089

Keywords:

Mayfield insertion, Scalp block, 0.5% levobupivacaine, 0.5% bupivacaine haemodynamic response

Abstract

Objective: Present study was performed to compare the effectiveness of 0.5% bupivacaine hydrochloride and 0.5% levobupivacaine for scalp block on the haemodynamic response, efficacy and additional analgesic requirement of these drugs in the post operative period during Mayfield insertion for craniotomy.

Methods: 60 patients of American society of anaesthesiologists physical status Ⅰ and Ⅱ who underwent elective craniotomies were randomly divided into two groups Group B (n=30) who received scalp block with 0.5% bupivacaine hydrochloride 25 ml, Group L (n=30) received 25 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine 5 min prior to Mayfield insertion. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), pulse rate, pain score (VAS score), additional intraoperative and postoperative analgesic requirement were recorded at different time points.

Results: Pulse rate, mean arterial pressure were stable during and after Mayfield insertion in both groups at all time points.

Conclusion: Both bupivacaine and levobupivacaine for scalp block are equally effective in attenuating haemoynamic responses during Mayfield insertion. Levobupivacaine being less toxic can be a safe alternative for scalp block.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Flexman AM, Ng JL, Gelb AW. Acute and chronic pain following craniotomy. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2010;23(5):551-7. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0b013e32833e15b9, PMID 20717011.

Sprung J, Flick RP, Katusic SK, Colligan RC, Barbaresi WJ, Bojanic K. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder after early exposure to procedures requiring general anesthesia. Mayo Clin Proc. 2012;87(2):120-9. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2011.11.008, PMID 22305025.

Doblar DD, Lim YC, Baykan N, Fisher W, Hadley M. Preventing the hypertensive response to skull pin insertion: a comparison of four methods. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 1994;6(4):314. doi: 10.1097/00008506-199410000-00046.

Chaki T, Sugino S, Janicki PK, Ishioka Y, Hatakeyama Y, Hayase T. Efficacy and safety of a lidocaine and ropivacaine mixture for scalp nerve block and local infiltration anesthesia in patients undergoing awake craniotomy. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 2016 Jan;28(1):1-5. doi: 10.1097/ANA.0000000000000149, PMID 25493926.

Guilfoyle MR, Helmy A, Duane D, Hutchinson PJ. Regional scalp block for postcraniotomy analgesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesth Analg. 2013 May;116(5):1093-102. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182863c22, PMID 23477962.

Bajwa SJ, Kaur J. Clinical profile of levobupivacaine in regional anesthesia: a systematic review. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013;29(4):530-9. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.119172, PMID 24249993.

Hussien G, Othman S, Abbass O, Aboeldahab H, Fareed M. Does scalp block with general anesthesia in craniotomy affect the intraoperative course and outcome in geriatric patients? Ain-Shams J Anaesthesiol. 2015;8(1):25. doi: 10.4103/1687-7934.153934.

Pinosky ML, Fishman RL, Reeves ST, Harvey SC, Patel S, Palesch Y. The effect of bupivacaine skull block on the hemodynamic response to craniotomy. Anesth Analg. 1996;83(6):1256-61. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199612000-00022, PMID 8942596.

Geze S, Yilmaz AA, Tuzuner F. The effect of scalp block and local infiltration on the haemodynamic and stress response to skull-pin placement for craniotomy. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26(4):298-303. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32831aedb2, PMID 19262392.

Santos AC, DeArmas PI. Systemic toxicity of levobupivacaine, bupivacaine, and ropivacaine during continuous intravenous infusion to nonpregnant and pregnant ewes. Anesthesiology. 2001;95(5):1256-64. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200111000-00033, PMID 11684998.

Lee YY, Muchhal K, Chan CK. Levobupivacaine versus racemic bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for urological surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2003;31(6):637-41. doi: 10.1177/0310057X0303100604, PMID 14719424.

Bracho Pardey FG, Alne R, Barcelos G, Sindou M, Naous H. Levobupivacaine scalp nerve block: haemodynamics and anaesthesia requirements in supratentorial craniotomy. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2008;25;P096:33-4.

Bala I, Gupta B, Bhardwaj N, Ghai B, Khosla VK. Effect of scalp block on postoperative pain relief in craniotomy patients. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2006;34(2):224-7. doi: 10.1177/0310057X0603400203, PMID 16617645.

Hwang JY, Bang JS, Oh CW, Joo JD, Park SJ, Do SH. Effect of scalp blocks with levobupivacaine on recovery profiles after craniotomy for aneurysm clipping: a randomized, double-blind, and controlled study. World Neurosurg. 2015 Jan;83(1):108-13. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2013.05.009, PMID 23743219.