Authors :
Dr. Srishti Salunke; Dr. Anuj Dadhich; Dr. Seemit Shah; Dr. Harish Saluja; Dr. Pulkit Khandelwal; Dr. Kedar Kawsankar; Dr. Megha Kiran; Dr. BL Himaja Reddy
Volume/Issue :
Volume 8 - 2023, Issue 11 - November
Google Scholar :
https://tinyurl.com/ycytjh9u
Scribd :
https://tinyurl.com/4cc5wskd
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10212093
Abstract :
Background: Ropivacaine is a long-acting amide local
anesthetic agent and firstproduced as a pure enantiomer.
It produces effects similar to other local anesthetics via
reversible inhibition of sodium ion influx in nerve fibers.
Ropivacaine is lesslipophilic than bupivacaine and is less
likely to penetrate large myelinated motorfibers,
resulting in a relatively reduced motor blockade. Thus,
ropivacaine has agreater degree of motor sensory
differentiation, which could be useful when
motorblockade is undesirable. The reduced lipophilicity
is also associated with decreasedpotential for central
nervous system toxicity and cardiotoxicity. The drug
displayslinear and dose proportional pharmacokinetics
(up to 80 mg administeredintravenously). It is
metabolized extensively in the liver and excreted in
urine. Thepresent article details the clinical applications
of ropivacaine and its current place asa local anesthetic
in the group.
Materials and methods: The research was undertaken
following approval from the institutional ethics
committee and spanned a duration of two years, during
which a comprehensive evaluation was performed on 52
participants.
Results: A bigger sample size should beconsidered for
more specific comparison. Bupivacaine has a very long
duration ofaction which is not required for minor
surgical procedure whereas Ropivacaine alsois long
acting but less than Bupivacaine which is perfect for
more time requiredprocedures and post –operative
analgesia. Ropivacaine has vasoconstrictive natureand
the difference was seen bleeding was more when
Bupivacaine was used. In ourstudy no adverse effects
were encountered when we used both the drugs
butBupivacaine is cardiotoxic in nature and changes in
blood pressure and heart ratewere seen when
Bupivacaine was used so Ropivacaine can be considered
to be usedin Oral and Maxillofacial surgery
Conclusion: So, to conclude, my opinion when 0.2%
Ropivacaine and 0.25%Bupivacaine was compared in
sample size 52, 0.2% Ropivacaine was better in termsof
early onset and duration than 0.25% Bupivacaine.
Keywords :
Anesthesia, Local anaesthetic, Ropivacaine, Bupivacaine.
Background: Ropivacaine is a long-acting amide local
anesthetic agent and firstproduced as a pure enantiomer.
It produces effects similar to other local anesthetics via
reversible inhibition of sodium ion influx in nerve fibers.
Ropivacaine is lesslipophilic than bupivacaine and is less
likely to penetrate large myelinated motorfibers,
resulting in a relatively reduced motor blockade. Thus,
ropivacaine has agreater degree of motor sensory
differentiation, which could be useful when
motorblockade is undesirable. The reduced lipophilicity
is also associated with decreasedpotential for central
nervous system toxicity and cardiotoxicity. The drug
displayslinear and dose proportional pharmacokinetics
(up to 80 mg administeredintravenously). It is
metabolized extensively in the liver and excreted in
urine. Thepresent article details the clinical applications
of ropivacaine and its current place asa local anesthetic
in the group.
Materials and methods: The research was undertaken
following approval from the institutional ethics
committee and spanned a duration of two years, during
which a comprehensive evaluation was performed on 52
participants.
Results: A bigger sample size should beconsidered for
more specific comparison. Bupivacaine has a very long
duration ofaction which is not required for minor
surgical procedure whereas Ropivacaine alsois long
acting but less than Bupivacaine which is perfect for
more time requiredprocedures and post –operative
analgesia. Ropivacaine has vasoconstrictive natureand
the difference was seen bleeding was more when
Bupivacaine was used. In ourstudy no adverse effects
were encountered when we used both the drugs
butBupivacaine is cardiotoxic in nature and changes in
blood pressure and heart ratewere seen when
Bupivacaine was used so Ropivacaine can be considered
to be usedin Oral and Maxillofacial surgery
Conclusion: So, to conclude, my opinion when 0.2%
Ropivacaine and 0.25%Bupivacaine was compared in
sample size 52, 0.2% Ropivacaine was better in termsof
early onset and duration than 0.25% Bupivacaine.
Keywords :
Anesthesia, Local anaesthetic, Ropivacaine, Bupivacaine.