Dr B. Girish, Dr P. Krishna Prasad
Abstract: Aim: To compare the efficacy of Bupivacaine 0.125 % (Group B) versus 0.2 % Ropivacaine (Group R ), in terms of pain scores, requirement of rescue analgesia, related adverse effects, and duration of postoperative hospital stay. Methods: 100 patients were randomly allocated into two groups of 50 each. Group B received 0.125 % bupivacaine epidurally. Group R received 0.2 % ropivacaine epidurally for postoperative pain relief. All patients were monitored for postoperative pain by the visual analog scale (VAS), requirement of rescue analgesia, hemodynamic parameters and adverse effects. Results: VAS pain scores were comparable in Group B, and Group R. requirement of rescue analgesia were comparable in Group R and Group B. Adverse effects such as hypotension and delayed motor block was higher in Group B when compared to group R. Conclusion: Ropivacaine 0.2 % and bupivacaine 0.125 % were equally efficient in terms of VAS pain scores, rescue analgesic requirement, and duration of postoperative hospital stay, but ropivacaine had a better safety profile in terms of less hypotension and lesser motor block.
Keywords: Bupivacaine, Epidural, Ropivacaine, Total knee arthroplasty