Comparison of Continuous Popliteal Nerve Blocks Using Lidocaine versus Bupivacaine Infusions for Ambulatory Foot Surgery: A Randomized, Double-blind, Noninferiority Trial

Simple item page
dc.article.number1266270
dc.catalogadoraba
dc.contributor.authorEchevarría, Ghislaine
dc.contributor.authorAltermatt Couratier, Fernando René
dc.contributor.authorMiranda Hiriart, Pablo
dc.contributor.authorAraneda Vilches, Andrea Lucía
dc.contributor.authorCorvetto Aqueveque, Marcia Antonia
dc.contributor.authorDe La Fuente Sanhueza, René Francisco
dc.contributor.authorCuadra F., Juan Carlos de la
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-18T16:28:09Z
dc.date.available2024-03-18T16:28:09Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.description.abstractBackground and objectives: Continuous sciatic popliteal nerve block effectivelymanages pain after ankle and foot surgery. Most studies on continuous infusionof local anesthetics by perineural catheters have been made with bupivacaine,levobupivacaine, and ropivacaine, but lidocaine has not been used. The mainobjective of this study was to compare the quality of analgesia, motor function,and side effects between lidocaine and bupivacaine infusions in bilateralcontinuous popliteal nerve blocks for foot surgery.Methods: This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group,noninferiority study. We enrolled 70 patients undergoing bilateral foot or anklesurgery that could be performed under general anesthesia and continuous regionalanalgesia using sciatic popliteal nerve blocks. During their postoperative care, theywere randomized into 2 groups: group lidocaine (lidocaine 0.5%, 5 ml/h) or groupbupivacaine (bupivacaine 0.1%, 5 ml/h), administered through elastomeric pumps.The primary outcome was pain at 24 h after surgery, assessed by a verbal numericrating scale (ranging from 0 to 10). A pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 1.5 wasdefined. Secondary outcomes were the degree of motor and sensitive block, totalopioid use, and difficulties with pump or catheter management.Results: The mean postoperative pain at 24 h of surgery was 2.06 (95% bootstrapconfidence interval bCI 1.29, 2.83) and 1.82 (95% bCI 1.02, 2.62) in the lidocaineand bupivacaine group, respectively. The upper limit of the 95% bCI for the meandifference between lidocaine and bupivacaine was 0.82, declaring non-inferiority.No differences in the postoperative rescue analgesia use and satisfaction withcare were found. No differences in postoperative NRS, sensory block and motorblock were seen between groups.Conclusions: Lidocaine 0.5% and bupivacaine 0.1% provide similar postoperativeanalgesia through a sciatic popliteal catheter in ambulatory bilateral foot surgery patients.
dc.fechaingreso.objetodigital2024-03-18
dc.fuente.origenORCID
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fanes.2023.1266270
dc.identifier.eissn2813-480X
dc.identifier.urihttp://doi.org/10.3389/fanes.2023.1266270
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uc.cl/handle/11534/84611
dc.information.autorucEscuela de Medicina; Miranda Hiriart, Pablo; S/I; 126188
dc.information.autorucEscuela de Medicina; Araneda Vilches, Andrea Lucía; S/I; 209497
dc.information.autorucEscuela de Medicina; Corvetto Aqueveque, Marcia Antonia; 0000-0003-4688-0210; 146036
dc.information.autorucEscuela de Medicina; De La Fuente Sanhueza, René Francisco; 0000-0001-7187-3405; 102089
dc.information.autorucEscuela de Medicina; Cuadra F., Juan Carlos de la; 0000-0002-3868-0764; 58562
dc.language.isoen
dc.nota.accesoContenido completo
dc.pagina.final7
dc.pagina.inicio1
dc.revistaFrontiers in Anesthesiology
dc.rightsacceso abierto
dc.rights.licenseCC BY 4.0 DEED Attribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectLidocaine
dc.subjectAmbulatory regional analgesia
dc.subjectUltrasound guided regional block
dc.subjectPopliteal nerve block
dc.subjectBupivacaine
dc.subjectNon-inferiority analysis
dc.subject.ddc610
dc.subject.deweyMedicina y saludes_ES
dc.subject.ods03 Good health and well-being
dc.subject.odspa03 Salud y bienestar
dc.titleComparison of Continuous Popliteal Nerve Blocks Using Lidocaine versus Bupivacaine Infusions for Ambulatory Foot Surgery: A Randomized, Double-blind, Noninferiority Trial
dc.typeartículo
dc.volumen2
sipa.codpersvinculados126188
sipa.codpersvinculados209497
sipa.codpersvinculados146036
sipa.codpersvinculados102089
sipa.codpersvinculados58562
sipa.trazabilidadORCID;2024-03-18
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
FANES-~1.PDF
Size:
382.93 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Artículos de revistas