E
t3RIT
-l --
Lignocaine vs bupivacaine in prominent ear correction: R. H. Roberts.
a controlled trial
S. T. Tan and S. W. Sinclair
_____ .s’C’Af:\f,4 .R I’. Thirty patients were assigned to two equal groups to compare the effects of ear infiltration with bupivacaine versus lignocaine prior to correction of prominent ears. There was a statistically significant decrease in narcotic requirement in the first 4 h postoperatively in the bupivacaine group, associated with a decrease in the antiemetic requirement. The choice of local anaesthetic did not significantly affect the incidence of vomiting.
\‘omiting is distressingly common after prominent ear correction under general anaesthesia (Burtles. 1989). Preincisional infiltration of the ear with a local anaesthettc agent and a vasoconstrictor is a common practice. A double blind controlled trial was conducted to test the hypothesis that the longer period of analgesia provided by bupivacaine in comparison to Ii_gnocaine vvould decrease postoperative narcotic requirements and by this or other mechanism. would lower the incidence of vomiting. Lignocainc hydrochloride is an amide type agent with an tntermediatc duration of action which is prolonged by the addition of adrenaline. We used a I ‘!i, solution with adrenaline I :200000 which is the recommended strength for infiltration. Each procedure lasted less than 60 min. which is shorter than the predicted duration of action of lignocaine when combined with adrenaline (Wood and Wood. 1990). Bupivacaine hydrochloride is also an amide type local anaesthetic. It has a long duration of action which is not significantly prolonged by the addition ol ktdrenaline (Greaney, 1990). Like other local anaesthetic agents the analgesic ctTect has. an earlier onset and a longer duration than the anaesthetic effect. It has a similar depth of :maesthcsia as lignocaine but is 4 times more potent ( Martindale. 19x4,: Wood and Wood. 1990). We used ,I 0.25 (’0 solution with adrenaline I :400000. This
t3RIT
-l --
Lignocaine vs bupivacaine in prominent ear correction: R. H. Roberts.
a controlled trial
S. T. Tan and S. W. Sinclair
_____ .s’C’Af:\f,4 .R I’. Thirty patients were assigned to two equal groups to compare the effects of ear infiltration with bupivacaine versus lignocaine prior to correction of prominent ears. There was a statistically significant decrease in narcotic requirement in the first 4 h postoperatively in the bupivacaine group, associated with a decrease in the antiemetic requirement. The choice of local anaesthetic did not significantly affect the incidence of vomiting.
\‘omiting is distressingly common after prominent ear correction under general anaesthesia (Burtles. 1989). Preincisional infiltration of the ear with a local anaesthettc agent and a vasoconstrictor is a common practice. A double blind controlled trial was conducted to test the hypothesis that the longer period of analgesia provided by bupivacaine in comparison to Ii_gnocaine vvould decrease postoperative narcotic requirements and by this or other mechanism. would lower the incidence of vomiting. Lignocainc hydrochloride is an amide type agent with an tntermediatc duration of action which is prolonged by the addition of adrenaline. We used a I ‘!i, solution with adrenaline I :200000 which is the recommended strength for infiltration. Each procedure lasted less than 60 min. which is shorter than the predicted duration of action of lignocaine when combined with adrenaline (Wood and Wood. 1990). Bupivacaine hydrochloride is also an amide type local anaesthetic. It has a long duration of action which is not significantly prolonged by the addition ol ktdrenaline (Greaney, 1990). Like other local anaesthetic agents the analgesic ctTect has. an earlier onset and a longer duration than the anaesthetic effect. It has a similar depth of :maesthcsia as lignocaine but is 4 times more potent ( Martindale. 19x4,: Wood and Wood. 1990). We used ,I 0.25 (’0 solution with adrenaline I :400000. This
