International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research  |  e-ISSN: 2582-8940  |  Double-Blind Peer Review  |  Open Access  |  CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

Current Issues
     2026:7/4

International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research

e-ISSN: 2582-8940 | Open Access

Comparison of Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia in Ultrasound-Guided Femoro-Sciatic Nerve Block in Patients Undergoing Below Knee Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Dr. Shail Ashokbhai Patel, Dr. Shailja Sharma, Dr. Nikhil Vaid, Dr. Jayshree, Dr. Zubin, Dr. Wamiq Javed

Post Graduate Resident, Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Saraswathi Institute of Medical Sciences, Pilkhuwa, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh, India; Professor and HOD, Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Saraswathi Institute of Medical Sciences, Pilkhuwa, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh, India; Assistant Professor, Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Saraswathi Institute of Medical Sciences, Pilkhuwa, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh, India

Article Information

Volume / Issue6 / 3 (July-September 2025)
Pages134-140
AccessOpen Access

Publication Timeline

  • Received16 June 2025
  • Accepted19 July 2025
  • Published

Full Text (PDF)

Open Access - Free to Download

Download Full Article (PDF) JATS XML

Abstract

Below knee surgeries require effective postoperative pain management to optimize patient outcomes and facilitate early mobilization. This randomized, double-blind, controlled trial aimed to compare the efficacy of bupivacaine versus ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia in ultrasound-guided femoro-sciatic nerve block in patients undergoing below knee surgery. A total of 120 patients aged 18-70 years, ASA physical status I-III, scheduled for elective below knee surgeries were randomly allocated into two groups of 60 patients each: Group B received 0.5% bupivacaine 30 mL and Group R received 0.5% ropivacaine 30 mL for combined femoral and sciatic nerve blocks under ultrasound guidance. The primary outcome was duration of postoperative analgesia, defined as time to first rescue analgesic request. Secondary outcomes included onset time, block characteristics, pain scores using visual analog scale, total analgesic consumption, patient satisfaction, and adverse effects. The duration of postoperative analgesia was significantly longer in Group B compared to Group R (18.4 ± 3.2 hours vs 14.7 ± 2.8 hours, p<0.001). Onset of sensory block was faster with ropivacaine (12.8 ± 3.4 minutes vs 15.6 ± 4.1 minutes, p<0.01), while motor block onset was comparable between groups. Pain scores were significantly lower in Group B at 12 and 18 hours postoperatively. Total morphine consumption over 24 hours was lower in Group B (8.6 ± 3.2 mg vs 12.4 ± 4.1 mg, p<0.001). Patient satisfaction scores were higher in the bupivacaine group. No significant complications or adverse effects were observed in either group. Both bupivacaine and ropivacaine provide effective postoperative analgesia for below knee surgeries when used in ultrasound-guided femoro-sciatic nerve blocks. Bupivacaine demonstrated superior duration of analgesia and reduced analgesic requirements, while ropivacaine offered faster onset and excellent safety profile. The choice between these agents should be individualized based on surgical requirements, patient factors, and desired duration of analgesia.

Keywords

BupivacaineRopivacaineFemoro-Sciatic Nerve BlockUltrasound-GuidedPostoperative AnalgesiaBelow Knee SurgeryRegional Anesthesia

References

  1. Joshi GP, Ogunnaike BO. Consequences of inadequate postoperative pain relief and chronic persistent postoperative pain. Anesthesiol Clin North America. 2005;23(1):21-36.\ [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  2. Apfelbaum JL, Chen C, Mehta SS, et al. Postoperative pain experience: results from a national survey suggest postoperative pain continues to be undermanaged. Anesth Analg. 2003;97(2):534-540. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  3. Wheeler M, Oderda GM, Ashburn MA, et al. Adverse events associated with postoperative opioid analgesia: a systematic review. J Pain. 2002;3(3):159-180. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  4. Liu SS, Richman JM, Thirlby RC, et al. Efficacy of continuous wound catheters delivering local anesthetic for postoperative analgesia: a quantitative and qualitative systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203(6):914-932. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  5. Vloka JD, Hadzic A, Drobnik L, et al. Anatomical landmarks for femoral nerve block: a comparison of four needle insertion sites. Anesth Analg. 1999;89(6):1467-1470. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  6. Capdevila X, Biboulet P, Bouregba M, et al. Comparison of the three-in-one and fascia iliaca compartment blocks in adults: clinical and radiographic analysis. Anesth Analg. 1998;86(5):1039-1044. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  7. Marhofer P, Greher M, Kapral S. Ultrasound guidance in regional anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2005;94(1):7-17. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  8. Casati A, Baciarello M, Di Cianni S, et al. Effects of ultrasound guidance on the minimum effective anaesthetic volume required to block the femoral nerve. Br J Anaesth. 2007;98(6):823-827. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  9. Sites BD, Gallagher JD, Cravero J, et al. The learning curve associated with a simulated ultrasound-guided interventional task by inexperienced anesthesia residents. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2004;29(6):544-548. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  10. Covino BG, Wildsmith JA. Clinical pharmacology of local anaesthetic agents. Br J Anaesth. 1998;81(1):58-68. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  11. Knudsen K, Beckman Suurküla M, Blomberg S, et al. Central nervous and cardiovascular effects of i.v. infusions of ropivacaine, bupivacaine and placebo in volunteers. Br J Anaesth. 1997;78(5):507-514. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  12. Albright GA. Cardiac arrest following regional anesthesia with etidocaine or bupivacaine. Anesthesiology. 1979;51(4):285-287. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  13. Arthur GR, Feldman HS, Covino BG. Comparative pharmacokinetics of bupivacaine and ropivacaine, a new amide local anesthetic. Anesth Analg. 1988;67(11):1053-1058. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  14. Scott DB, Lee A, Fagan D, et al. Acute toxicity of ropivacaine compared with that of bupivacaine. Anesth Analg. 1989;69(5):563-569. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  15. Zaric D, Axelsson K, Nydahl PA, et al. Sensory and motor blockade during epidural analgesia with 1%, 0.75%, and 0.5% ropivacaine--a double-blind study. Anesth Analg. 1991;72(4):509-515. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  16. Casati A, Putzu M. Bupivacaine, levobupivacaine and ropivacaine: are they clinically different? Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2005;19(2):247-268. [Google Scholar][Crossref]

How to Cite

Patel, S. A., Sharma, S., Vaid, N., Jayshree, Zubin, & Javed, W. (2025). Comparison of Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia in Ultrasound-Guided Femoro-Sciatic Nerve Block in Patients Undergoing Below Knee Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research, 6(3), 134-140. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMBHR.2025.6.3.134-140

Patel, Shail Ashokbhai, et al. "Comparison of Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia in Ultrasound-Guided Femoro-Sciatic Nerve Block in Patients Undergoing Below Knee Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial." International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research, vol. 6, no. 3, 2025, pp. 134-140. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMBHR.2025.6.3.134-140.

Patel, S. A., Sharma, S., Vaid, N., Jayshree, Zubin and Javed, W. (2025) 'Comparison of Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia in Ultrasound-Guided Femoro-Sciatic Nerve Block in Patients Undergoing Below Knee Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial', International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research, 6(3), pp. 134-140. doi: 10.54660/IJMBHR.2025.6.3.134-140.

Patel SA, Sharma S, Vaid N, Jayshree, Zubin, Javed W. Comparison of Bupivacaine and Ropivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia in Ultrasound-Guided Femoro-Sciatic Nerve Block in Patients Undergoing Below Knee Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research. 2025;6(3):134-140. doi:10.54660/IJMBHR.2025.6.3.134-140

Similar Articles

Share

Find this Article on

Google Scholar Semantic Scholar OpenAlex Scilit Crossref ResearchGate BASE

A newly published article may take a few days to appear on these services.