Why the study?
Does intravenous ropivacaine improve physiological and hemodynamic parameters compared to bupivacaine in a porcine model of endotoxemic shock?
Does intravenous ropivacaine improve physiological and hemodynamic parameters compared to bupivacaine in a porcine model of endotoxemic shock?
In a porcine model of endotoxemic shock, intravenous ropivacaine demonstrated pathophysiological advantages over bupivacaine, including improved tissue perfusion and maintenance of platelet counts.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Hypothesis-generating in porcine endotoxemia; leaves open translation to human septic shock pending prospective trials.
Patients that undergo major abdominal surgery often receive epidural postoperative analgesia. Septic complications are frequently seen in this cohort. In a porcine model of endotoxemic shock, resembling human gram-negative septic shock, we evaluated the effects of two widely used local anaesthetics, bupivacaine and ropivacaine given intravenously. In the endotoxin-ropivacaine group mixed venous saturation and platelet count were higher as compared to endotoxemic controls. Mean arterial blood pressure and platelet count were higher in ropivacaine-endotoxin pigs than in bupivacaine-endotoxin ones. Bupivacaine augmented endotoxin-mediated decrease in left ventricular stroke work index. Ropivacaine displays pathophysiological advantages compared to bupivacaine in septic shock, which may be explained by improved tissue perfusion by ropivacaine.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mutschler et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: