Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE Spinal anesthesia is well suited for day-care surgery, however a persisting motor block after surgery can delay discharge. Among the new drugs available, chloroprocaine has been associated with a short onset time, and motor block duration and a quicker discharge. However, it is not clear if those outcomes are clinically significantly superior compared to those associated with the use of low-dose hyperbaric bupivacaine.
DESIGN Aim of the study was to determine if spinal 2-chloroprocaine was superior to low-dose spinal bupivacaine regarding the following outcomes: onset time, block duration, time to ambulation and time to discharge.
PATIENTS/INTERVENTIONS We performed a systematic literature search of the last 30 years using PubMed Embase and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. We included only blinded, prospective trials comparing chloroprocaine with a low dose of bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia. Low dose bupivacaine was defined as a dose of 10 mg or less. Outcomes of interest were time to motor block regression (primary outcome), time to ambulation and time to discharge (secondary outcomes), as indirect indicators of a complete recovery after spinal anesthesia.
MAIN RESULTS Compared to a low dose bupivacaine, spinal 2-chloroprocaine was associated with significantly faster motor and sensory block regression (pMD = -57 min-140.3 min; P = 0.015 and <0.001 respectively), a significantly shorter time to ambulation and an earlier discharge (pMD = -84.6 min; P < 0.001 and pMD = -88.6 min and <0.001 respectively). Onset time did not differ between the two drugs (pMD = -1.1 min; P = 0.118).
CONCLUSIONS Spinal 2-chloroprocaine has a shorter motor block duration, a significantly quicker time to ambulation and time to discharge compared to low dose hyperbaric bupivacaine and may be advantageous when spinal anesthesia is performed for day case surgery.
Saporito, Andrea