Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
https://bjan-sba.org/article/doi/10.1590/S0034-70942005000300002
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
Scientific Article

Volume anestésico mínimo para bloqueio retrobulbar extraconal: comparação entre soluções a 0,5% de bupivacaína racêmica, de levobupivacaína e da mistura enantiomérica S75/R25 de bupivacaína

Minimum anesthetic volumes for extraconal retrobulbar block: comparison between 0.5% racemic bupivacaine, levobupivacaine and enantiomeric mixture S75/R25 bupivacaine

Luiz Fernando Soares; Ana Claudia de Melo Barros; Gustavo Paiva Almeida; Gustavo Luchi Boos; Getúlio Rodrigues de Oliveira Filho

Downloads: 0
Views: 972

Resumo

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: O volume anestésico mínimo (VAM) de um anestésico local é o volume efetivo para anestesia regional em 50% dos pacientes. O objetivo deste estudo foi calcular os volumes anestésicos mínimos das soluções a 0,5% de bupivacaína racêmica, de levobupivacaína e da mistura enantiomérica S75/R25 de bupivacaína para anestesia retrobulbar extraconal. MÉTODO: Foram estudadas duas séries de pacientes submetidos à extração de catarata. Na série 1, os pacientes receberam bupivacaína a 0,5% (n = 9) ou levobupivacaína a 0,5% (n = 11). Na série 2, os pacientes receberam bupivacaína racêmica a 0,5% (n = 11) ou a mistura enantiomérica S75/R25 de bupivacaína a 0,5% (n = 10). Os bloqueios foram realizados por injeção única ínfero-lateral. A mobilidade de cada músculo reto foi avaliada após 10 minutos como: 0 (ausente), 1 (diminuída) ou 2 (normal). A soma dos escores constituiu o escore total de mobilidade (ETM) do globo ocular. O volume inicial foi de 7,4 mL. Os volumes utilizados em pacientes subseqüentes corresponderam 0,1 unidade logarítmica maior (ETM > 2) ou menor (ETM < 2) que o logaritmo natural do volume precedente. Foram utilizadas as fórmulas de Massey e Dixon para cálculos dos VAM. RESULTADOS: Os volumes anestésicos mínimos da bupivacaína racêmica foram 6 mL e 6,2 mL, o da levobupivacaína foi 5,7 mL e o da mistura enantiomérica de bupivacaína S75/R25 foi 5,8 mL. Não houve diferença entre os grupos quanto aos volumes anestésicos efetivos. CONCLUSÕES: Volumes semelhantes de soluções a 0,5% de bupivacaína racêmica, levobupivacaína ou da mistura enantiomérica S75/R25 de bupivacaína são necessários para anestesia retrobulbar extraconal.

Palavras-chave

ANESTÉSICOS, Local, ANESTÉSICOS, Local, ANESTÉSICOS, Local, TÉCNICAS ANESTÉSICAS, Regional

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Minimum anesthetic volume (MAV) of local anesthetics corresponds to the effective volume for regional anesthesia in 50% of patients. In this study, MAV of 0.5% racemic bupivacaine, 0.5% levobupivacaine and enantiomeric S75/R25 bupivacaine were calculated and compared. METHODS: This study involved two series of patients undergoing cataract extraction. Series 1 patients received either 0.5% racemic bupivacaine (n = 9) or 0.5% levobupivacaine (n = 11). Series 2 patients received either 0.5% racemic bupivacaine (n = 11) or 0.5% enantiomeric S75/R25 bupivacaine (n = 10). Blockades were achieved by single-injection and inferior-lateral approach. Motility of each rectus muscle was assessed 10 minutes later as: 0 (absent), 1 (decreased) or 2 (normal). Total muscle scores represented total eye motility score (TMS). Local anesthetic volume administered to the first patient of each group was 7.4 mL. Subsequent patients received volumes corresponding to 0.1 higher natural logarithm unit (if TME > 2) or lower (if TME < 2) as compared to natural logarithm of preceding volume. Massey and Dixon's formulae were used for MAV calculations. RESULTS: MAVs of bupivacaine in both series were 6 mL and 6.2 mL, respectively. MAVs of levobupivacaine and enantiomeric S75/R25 bupivacaine were 5.7 mL and 5.8 mL, respectively. There were no differences between groups in effective anesthetic volumes. CONCLUSIONS: Similar volumes of 0.5% racemic bupivacaine, 0.5% levobupivacaine and enantiomeric S75/R25 bupivacaine are needed for extraconal retrobulbar anesthesia.

Keywords

ANESTHETICS, Local, ANESTHETICS, Local, ANESTHETICS, Local, ANESTHETIC TECHNIQUES, Regional

References

Casati A, Fanelli G, Magistris L. Minimum local anesthetic volume blocking the femoral nerve in 50% of cases: a double-blinded comparison between 0.5% ropivacaine and 0.5% bupivacaine. Anesth Analg. 2001;92:205-208.

Dixon WJ, Massey FJ. Introduction to Statistical Analysis. 1983.

Lichtman AH. The up-and-down method substantially reduces the number of animals required to determine antinociceptive ED50 values. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 1998;40:81-85.

Frow MW, Miranda-Caraballo JI, Akhtar TM et al. Single injection retrobulbar extraconal anaesthesia. Total upper eyelid drop as an end-point marker. Anaesthesia. 2000;55:750-756.

Birt DJ, Cummings GC. The efficacy and safety of 0. 75% levobupivacaine vs 0.75% bupivacaine for retrobulbar extraconal anaesthesia. Eye. 2003;17:200-206.

Valenzuela C, Snyders DJ, Bennett PB. Stereoselective block of cardiac sodium channels by bupivacaine in guinea pig ventricular myocytes. Circulation. 1995;92:3014-3024.

Mazoit JX, Boico O, Samii K. Myocardial uptake of bupivacaine. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of bupivacaine enantiomers in the isolated perfused rabbit heart. Anesth Analg. 1993;77:477-482.

Simonetti MPB, Ferreira FMC. Obtenção de novos anestésicos locais através da modificação da relação enantiomérica da bupivacaína racêmica. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 1999;49:(Supl):CBA156.

Nicoll JM, Treuren B, Acharya PA. Retrobulbar anesthesia: the role of hyaluronidase. Anesth Analg. 1986;65:1324-1328.

Ross EM. Pharmacodynamics: Mechanisms of Drug Action and the Relationship between Drug Concentration and Effect. Goodman & Gilman's the Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics. 1996:29-41.

Langerman L, Golomb E, Grant GJ. Duration of spinal anaesthesia is determined by the partition coefficient of local anaesthetic. Br J Anaesth. 1994;72:456-459.

Sonner JM. Issues in the design and interpretation of minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration (MAC) studies. Anesth Analg. 2002;95:609-614.

Edge KR, McClarty CP, Krige SJ. Comparison of an extraconal block with a retrobulbar-facial block combination for ocular surgery: A safe alternative technique to the combination of retrobulbar block and facial nerve block. S Afr J Surg. 1995;33:117-119.

5dd7ccb40e88257e2c13f286 rba Articles
Links & Downloads

Braz J Anesthesiol

Share this page
Page Sections