Users Online: 259 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  
Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Subscribe | Contacts | Login 


RSACP wishes to inform that it shall be discontinuing the dispatch of print copy of JOACP to it's Life members. The print copy of JOACP will be posted only to those life members who send us a written confirmation for continuation of print copy.
Kindly email your affirmation for print copies to dranjugrewal@gmail.com preferably by 30th June 2019.

 

 
Table of Contents
LETTER TO EDITOR
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 28  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 411-412

0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine - Do we still need a 4 ml ampoule?


Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune and Command Hospital (SC), Pune, India

Date of Web Publication11-Jul-2012

Correspondence Address:
Rakhee Goyal
NP-5 Officers Project Quarters, MH, CTC, Pune - 411 040
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0970-9185.98377

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Goyal R, Bhargava D V. 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine - Do we still need a 4 ml ampoule?. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2012;28:411-2

How to cite this URL:
Goyal R, Bhargava D V. 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine - Do we still need a 4 ml ampoule?. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol [serial online] 2012 [cited 2019 Oct 19];28:411-2. Available from: http://www.joacp.org/text.asp?2012/28/3/411/98377

Sir,

Hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% is the most common drug used for a subarachnoid block (SAB) in India. The use is usually restricted for surgeries which require anesthesia from T-6 and below dermatome levels. Although 4 ml ampoules are in use for some time, the authors believe that more than 3 ml of bupivacaine is never really required for safe anesthesia for any surgery. In the current decade, the use of spinal additive drugs and combined spinal-epidural techniques is neither uncommon nor considered difficult to achieve good quality and prolonged analgesia or anesthesia. An epidural infusion via a catheter placed along with an SAB will provide adequate dermatome level, quality, and duration of anesthesia without the undesirable effects of a high spinal blockade.

This hypothesis cannot be complete without a quick review of the factors that affect the block height of an SAB. The most important factors include the baricity, the position of the patient, and the mass of the drug. [1] The height and weight of the patient do not have significant clinical effects on the dose of hyperbaric bupivacaine. A simple clinical derivation of this fact is that the block height increases by lowering the head end of the patient, keeping the mass and baricity of the drug constant. Injection site (L 2-3 vs. L 4-5) can also affect the level of block keeping the position of the patient constant. 15 mg or 3 ml of bupivacaine is the safe maximum mass of drug mentioned in most literature for a maximum achievable block height. [1]

The duration of a block depends mainly on the type of drug and can be increased, if required with the use of spinal additives such as opioids, α-2 agonists, etc., or an epidural add on. [2] Moreover, we know that a more extensive sympathetic block will cause more undesirable hemodynamic effects, [3] and therefore, it should be targeted to only the dermatomes necessary for the procedure. A large dose (volume) cannot ensure low dermatome blockade in any patient position.

The authors tried to analyze the difference in the cost factor if bupivacaine was made available in 3 ml instead of a 4 ml ampoule. We checked the records in our multispecialty tertiary hospital in the last 1 year. 2566 SAB were administered out of which ≤3 ml bupivacaine was used in 99.65% of the cases. The cost of one commercially available ampoule is not prohibitive, but the collective cost of ≥1 ml being wasted in a large number of SAB may be significant. Other relevant factors affecting the cost (like intravenous fluids/vasopressors or epidural set/spinal additive drugs) however, limits the strength of our hypothesis.

So, is there is the need to administer more than 3 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine in any patient! Is it not safer to use an epidural or an additive drug along with the spinal block! Why should it be marketed for regular use in a 4 ml ampoule at all!

 
  References Top

1.Daniel T. Warren. Neuraxial Anesthesia. In: Longnecker DE, Brown DL, Newman MF, Zapol WM, eds. Anesthesiology. New York : Mcgraw-Hill 2008; 978-1008  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Hamber Ea, Viscomi CM. Intrathecal lipophilic opioids as adjuncts to surgical spinal anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med 1999;24:255-263  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Carpenter RL, Caplan RA, Brown DL, et al. Incidence and risk factors for side effects of spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1992; 76:906-916  Back to cited text no. 3
    




 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
   References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1331    
    Printed47    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded288    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal