Recovery From Ropivacaine-Induced or Levobupivacaine-Induced Cardiac Arrest in Rats: Comparison of Lipid Emulsion Effects

Authors:
Open Access
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lipid emulsion treatment appears to have application in the treatment of local anesthetic–induced cardiac arrest. To examine whether the efficacy of lipid resuscitation in the treatment of local anesthetic–induced cardiac arrest is affected by lipophilicity, the effects of lipid infusions were compared between levobupivacaine-induced (high lipophilicity) and ropivacaine-induced (lower lipophilicity) rat cardiac arrest model. METHODS: A total of 28 female Sprague-Dawley rats were anesthetized using sevoflurane, which subsequently underwent tracheostomy, followed by femoral artery and vein cannulation. Two hours after the discontinuation of sevoflurane, either levobupivacaine 0.2% (n = 14) or ropivacaine 0.2% (n = 14) was administered at a rate of 2 mg/kg/min to the awake rats. When the pulse pressure decreased to 0, the infusion of local anesthetic was discontinued, and treatment with chest compressions and ventilation with 100% oxygen were immediately initiated. The total doses of local anesthetics needed to trigger the first seizure and pulse pressure of 0 mm Hg were calculated. The 2 groups were each subdivided into a lipid emulsion group (n = 7) and a control group (n = 7). In the lipid emulsion group, 20% lipid emulsion was administered intravenously (5 mL/kg bolus plus continuous infusion of 0.5 mL/kg/min), while in the control group, the same volume of normal saline was administered. Chest compressions were discontinued when the rate-pressure product had increased by more than 20% of baseline. RESULTS: The cumulative doses of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine that produced seizures and 0 pulse pressure showed no significant difference. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) values were higher in the levobupivacaine group than in the ropivacaine group after resuscitation was initiated (P < .05). In levobupivacaine-induced cardiac arrest, heart rate and MAP values were higher in the lipid group than in the control group after starting resuscitation (P < .05); all rats in the lipid group achieved spontaneous circulation (rate-pressure product >20% baseline), while only 2 of 7 rats in the control group achieved spontaneous circulation at 10 minutes. In ropivacaine-induced cardiac arrest, there were no significant differences in heart rate and MAP between the lipid and control groups from the start of resuscitation to 10 minutes; spontaneous circulation returned in 6 of 7 lipid group rats, but in only 2 of 7 control group rats at 10 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Lipid emulsion treatment was more effective for levobupivacaine-induced cardiac arrest than for ropivacaine-induced cardiac arrest. Although lipid therapy is also effective for ropivacaine-induced cardiac arrest, it takes more time than in levobupivacaine-induced cardiac arrest. This suggests that the lipophilicity of local anesthetics influences the efficacy of lipid infusion when treating cardiac arrest caused by these drugs.

This publication has 32 references indexed in Scilit: