CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by EDELIST, G.
Right arrow Articles by PERERA, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by EDELIST, G.
Right arrow Articles by PERERA, E.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 23, 459-464, Copyright © 1976 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

Comparison of Etidocaine and Lidocaine for Obstetrical Analgesia

GERALD EDELIST 1 and ELIZABETH PERERA 2

1 Department of Anaesthesia, University of Toronto; Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto
2 Resident in Anaesthesia

Etidocaine, a relatively new local anaesthetic agent, is compared with lidocaine for use in epidural anaesthesia for vaginal delivery. The parameters compared were quality of anaesthesia, dose of drug, onset and regression of sensory blockade, complete degree of motor blockade, effect on maternal blood pressure, and foetal Apgar scores at one and five minutes. The major differences between the drugs are the lower percentage of satisfactory anaesthesia with etidocaine, the much greater variability in the time of onset of complete sensory block with etidocaine as compared to lidocaine, the more profound motor block with etidocaine, and the slightly longer duration of action of this drug. It is concluded that etidocaine has no real place in epidural anaesthesia for obstetrics.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1976 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.