• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.4
• /
• pp.337-344
• /
• 2021

Background: The primary indication for using long-acting anesthetics in dentistry is extensive dental procedures that require pulpal anesthesia beyond 90 min and management of postoperative pain. Ropivacaine is an amide local anesthetic that is available at various concentrations with inherent vasoconstrictive properties at low concentrations. Ropivacaine has a 75% greater margin of safety than bupivacaine. Ropivacaine can be a good alternative to bupivacaine as a local anesthetic in dental implant surgery as it provides a longer duration of both pulpal and soft tissue anesthesia after mandibular nerve block and lowers CNS and cardiovascular toxicity. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy of ropivacaine and lignocaine for implant surgery anesthesia. Methods: Fifteen patients with bilateral edentulous sites indicated for implant placement were recruited for this study. Patients aged 20-60 years of both sexes were randomly recruited. Thirty implant placements were performed in the test and control groups using ropivacaine and lignocaine with adrenaline as local anesthetics, respectively. Results: The results were analyzed statistically. The duration of anesthesia was significantly higher in the test group than in the control group. Ropivacaine was found to be superior to lignocaine in terms of the quality of anesthesia. The comparison of mean visual analog scale scores showed ropivacaine to have better anesthetic and analgesic effects than the control group. Conclusion: Ropivacaine 0.75% provides a significantly longer duration of anesthesia than lignocaine 2% with adrenaline. Ropivacaine 0.75% decreased intraoperative and postoperative analgesia compared to lignocaine 2% with adrenaline. Hence, ropivacaine 0.75% can be used as an alternative to lignocaine in implant surgeries and other intraoral surgical procedures that require a longer duration of anesthesia and analgesia.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.49-54
• /
• 2000

Background: Evidence has accumulated that opioids can produce potent antinociceptive effects by interacting with opioid receptors in peripheral tissues. Bupivacaine has a potent analgesic effect with early peak onset in the postoperative period. The combination of intrapelvic bupivacaine and morphine has been suggested as an ideal analgesic after endoscopic pelvic surgery. Methods: Sixty patients scheduled for endoscopic pelvic surgery under general anesthesia were allocated randomly to three groups. Group 1 received normal saline 20 ml, group 2 received morphine 5 mg in normal saline 20 ml, and group 3 received morphine 5 mg in 0.25% bupivacaine 20 ml into the pelvic cavity. Postoperative pain was assessed using the visual analogue scale at 1, 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours after the intrapelvic instillation. Supplemental analgesic requirements, vital signs, and side effects were recorded for 24 hours. Results: Intrapelvic morphine and bupivacaine produced significant analgesia after endoscopic pelvic surgery. The patients in group 3 had lower pain scores than those in the group 1 and 2 at 1, 2 and 4th hours. There were no significant differences in the pain scores at 8 hours and 24 hours postoperatively between group 2 and 3. Supplemental analgesic requirements were significantly greater in the groups 1 and 2 than the group 3 for 24 hours. No significant side effects occurred. Conclusion: The intrapelvic instillation of morphine and bupivacaine is effective for the postoperative pain control in patients undergoing endoscopic pelvic surgery.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.81-85
• /
• 1998

Background: Continuous caudal epidural block is a useful method in postoperative pain control after perianal surgery. But caudal epidural block has the potential of developing adverse effects such as urinary retention. The goal of this study is to evaluate the analgesic and adverse effect of bupivacaine with fentanyl through continuous caudal epidural block in relation to the concentration of bupivacaine. Methods: We divided the patients randomly into two groups. For group I(n=25) postoperative pain was controlled by continuous caudal epidural infusion at the rate of 4 ml/hr of 0.0625% bupivacaine with 3 ${\mu}g$/ml fentanyl: group II(n=14), 0.125% bupivacaine with 3 ${\mu}g$/ml fentanyl, respectively, for duration of 48 hours via epidural catheter. We evaluated pain scores with visual analogue scales at 30 mins, 6 hrs, 12 hrs, 24 hrs and 48 hrs after the operation and the incidence of adverse effect, especially urinary retention, for each group. Results: There were no significant differences in the pain score between group I and II. Urinary retention developed in 9 patients(36%) of group I, and 11 patients (78.6%) of group II. Other adverse effects such as pruritus, nausea, vomiting and respiratory depression developed in few patients. Conclusions: While performing continuous caudal epidural block with mixture of bupivacaine and fentanyl after the perianal surgery, we conclude 0.0625% bupivacaine solution is preferable to 0.125% bupivacaine solution because 0.0625% solution resulted in satisfactory analgesia with minimal incidence of adverse effect.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.186-189
• /
• 2010

Background: Neuropathic pain resulting from diverse causes is a chronic condition for which effective treatment is lacking. The goal of this study was to test whether dexamethasone exerts a preemptive analgesic effect with bupivacaine when injected perineurally in the spared nerve injury model. Methods: Fifty rats were randomly divided into five groups. Group 1 (control) was ligated but received no drugs. Group 2 was perineurally infiltrated (tibial and common peroneal nerves) with 0.4% bupivacaine (0.2 ml) and dexamethasone (0.8 mg) 10 minutes before surgery. Group 3 was infiltrated with 0.4% bupivacaine (0.2 ml) and dexamethasone (0.8 mg) after surgery. Group 4 was infiltrated with normal saline (0.2 ml) and dexamethasone (0.8 mg) 10 minutes before surgery. Group 5 was infiltrated with only 0.4% bupivacaine (0.2 ml) before surgery. Rat paw withdrawal thresholds were measured using the von Frey hair test before surgery as a baseline measurement and on postoperative days 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 and 21. Results: In the group injected preoperatively with dexamethasone and bupivacaine, mechanical allodynia did not develop and mechanical threshold forces were significantly different compared with other groups, especially between postoperative days 3 and 9 (P < 0.05). Conclusions: In conclusion, preoperative infiltration of both dexamethasone and bupivacaine showed a significantly better analgesic effect than did infiltration of bupivacaine or dexamethasone alone in the spared nerve injury model, especially early on after surgery.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.34-41
• /
• 1997

Background : Patient-controlled analgesia(PCA) is a safe and effective technique for providing postoperative pain relief. Studies that compare epidural vs intravenous routes of opiate administration show conflicting results. We designed a prospective, randomized, controlled study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of epidural(EPI-PCA) morphine-bupivacaine versus intravenous (IV-PCA) nalbuphine when administered with a PCA system. Methods : Forty healthy women were randomly assigned to receive an epidural bolus of morphine 3 mg and 0.5% bupivacaine 10 ml, followed by a EPI-PCA with 0.01% morphine and 0.143% bupivacane (basal infusion 1 ml/hr, bolus 1 ml, lock-out interval 30 min) or intravenous bolus of nalbuphine 0.1 mg/kg followed by a IV-PCA with nalbuphine(basal infusion 1 mg/hr, bolus 1 ml, lock-out interval 20 min) for pain relief after cesarean delivery. This study was conducted for 2 days after cesarean section to compare the analgesic efficacy, side effects, patient satisfaction either as EPI-PCA or as IV-PCA. Results : EPI-PCA group had significant lower visual analog pain scale(VAS) at immediate postoperative period, whereas no significant difference was observed when pain was assessed at other time sequence. Urinary retention and pruritus were more frequent with EPI-PCA group, although the incidence of other side effects were the same. Conclusions : Although EPI-PCA with morphine-bupivacaine was of significantly lower VAS at immediate postoperative period, IV-PCA with nalbuphine is a safe and effective alternative to EPI-PCA with morphine-bupivacaine for providing pain relief after cesarean delivery. Further studies about IV-PCA with nalbuphine are needed to control the immediate postoperative pain and to further improve effective pain management.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.185-190
• /
• 1997

Background: Preemptive analgesia is an antinociceptive treatment that prevents the establishment of altered central processing which amplifies postoperative pain. A controversy exists over the effectiveness and clinical value of preemptive analgesia. We studied whether epidural bupivacaine and fentanyl prior to surgery could possibly affect postoperative pain and analgesic demands, as compared to administration of same at end of surgery. Methods: Forty patients scheduled for lower abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to one of two groups and prospectively studied in a double-blind method. Group 1(n=20) received epidural injection of 15 ml bupivacaine 0.25% with fentanyl 100 y g before surgery while group 2(n=20) received the same injection at the end of their surgery respectively. Postoperative analgesia consisted of basal plus patient-controlled mode of epidural bupivacaine and fentanyl from PCA system. Postoperative visual analog pain scores(VAPS), analgesics consumption, supplementary analgesics requirement and side effects were assessed for 3 postoperative days. Results: There were no significant difference in analgesics requirement and pain scores, at any time, during rest or after movement, in measurement between the groups. Conclusions: We conclude no clinical value of effectiveness in administering epidural bupivacaine-fentanyl before surgery as compared to administration after surgery.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.28-33
• /
• 1997

Background : Analgesic effect of intra-articular morphine or ketoronac treatment alone, or a combination of both drugs, on postoperative pain were evaluated in 40 healthy male patients undergoing arthroscopic knee surgery. Method : Upon completion of surgery under spinal anesthesia, each patients knee joint was injected with 30 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine. Then, via parenteral or intra-articular route, one study group received morphine and other group received ketorolac. Results : Groups who received either intra-articular ketorolac, or morphine, experienced decreased postoperative pain reducing need for additional analgesics. The combination treatment of intra-articular morphine and ketorolac did not improved results. Conclusions : Singular use of either intra-articular morphine, or ketorolac, improves postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing arthroscopic sugery: Combination of these drugs offered no further advantage over its single prescription.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.109-112
• /
• 1998

The sympathetic nervous system has been implicated as an important factor contributing to causalgia. Basis on reports of presence of opioid receptors in sympathetic autonomic ganglia, including human stellate ganglion, we administered morphine in stellate ganglion block for a patient with causalgia. The patient suffering from brachial plexus injury treated with stellate ganglion block in conjunction with physical therapy. Stellate ganglion block was performed in a paratracheal approach by injection of 1% lidocaine, or 0.25% bupivacaine 8 ml, with morpine 1 mg. Patient's symptoms were dramatically improved after 13 stellate ganglion blocks.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.138-141
• /
• 2005

Background: There have been many attempts to alleviate pain after surgery, but there is no common approach to the control of postoperative pain. The use of epidural opioids, with local anesthetics, has been a widely employed formula to date. Ketamine, an N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist, has an excellent analgesic effect. Although there have been many reports on the dose and route of administrating analgesics, there have been few concerning the continuous epidural infusion of ketamine with fentanyl. We designed this study to find the effects of ketamine compared to those of epidurally injected bupivacaine and fentanyl, and used this trial to study any potential side effects. Methods: In a double blind trial, 55 patients received either fentanyl, $0.3{\mu}g/kg/h$ (Group F), or fentanyl, $0.3{\mu}g/kg/h$, and ketamine, 0.1 mg/kg/h (Group FK), added to 0.125% bupivacaine, at rates as high as 2 ml/h, for patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) following a transabdominal hysterectomy. Ten minutes before the operation, patients received 10 ml of 0.125% bupivacaine, with either 0.5 mg/kg ketamine or the same amount of normal saline with $50{\mu}g$ fentanyl added. The pain scores and the side effects were recorded at 1, 3, 6 and 24 hour post operation. Results: There were no differences in the pain scores or side effects between the two groups. Conclusions: We failed to find any effect of the addition of epidural ketamine compared to the that of the bupivacaine and fentanyl formula. However, it is suggested that further investigations will be required on the dose and route of administration.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.188-192
• /
• 1994

Recently, epidural morphine has been administrated to decrease patients' systemic stress responses such as: suffers, endocrine responses and impairment of pulmonary function, etc. Epidural morphine provided excellent analgesic effect, but incomplete sensory blockade as compared to epidural local anesthetics, which has sympathetic blockade effect and tachyphylaxis. Therefore, the authors surmised that low dose bupivacaine on low dose epidural morphine improved postoperative pain with greater sensory analgesia than epidural morphine alone. The effect of low dose bupivacaine on epidural morphine analgesia for postoperative pain was evaluated in seventy patients. They were physical status I-III by ASA classification. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups and they were administrated morphine 2.5 mg only (group I), morphine 2.5 mg plus 0.125% bupivacaine (group II) through epidural catheter 1 hour before the end of the operation. During postoperative second days, their analgesic effects were evaluated by visual analogue scale (0-10). Side effects were also evaluated. The results were as follows, 1) On the day of the operation, VAS score showed significant differences between two groups (morphine group $3.20{\pm}0.16$, morphine plus bupivacaine group $2.77{\pm}0.08$; p < 0.05). 2) On the postoperative and second day, there were no statistical differences between the groups according to VAS score. 3) The incidence of pruritus, nausea, and vomiting were no differences in both groups. 4) None of the patients showed objective sedation or a low respiratory rate (< 10 bpm). We concluded that epidural administration of low dose bupivacaine on the epidural morphine analgesia was an effective method to decrease postoperative pain with little change in frequencies of side effects compared to epidural morphine alone.