BetaEntity Annotation Prototype
← Back to drugs

Annotated abstract

P302 Comparison of spinal chloroprocaine 1% and ropivacaine 0.75% in elective cesarean sections: a prospective randomized study

rapm · 2025-09-10 · canonical JSON source

14 visible annotations · policy: published · automated confidence ≥ 75.00%

Document resource

Please confirm that an ethics committee approval has been applied for or granted: Yes: I’m uploading the Ethics Committee Approval as a PDF file with this abstract submissionApplication for ESRA Abstract PrizesBackground and Aims Spinal anesthesia is the preferred method for elective cesarean sections due to its safety and efficacy profile. While ropivacaine is widely used in Greece, recent developments in preservative-free formulations of chloroprocaine have revived interest in its spinal application. This study aimed to compare the onset, duration, and safety profile of spinal chloroprocaine 1% versus ropivacaine 0.75% in women undergoing elective cesarean sectionMethods This is an interim analysis of a prospective, randomized, single-blind study in parturients subjected to elective cesarean section under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. Participants were allocated to group C, receiving 3.8 ml chloroprocaine 1% plus 10 µg fentanyl and Group R, receiving 1.8 ml ropivacaine 0.75% plus 10 µg fentanyl via the spinal route. The primary endpoints of this study include the onset and duration of sensory and motor blockade following intrathecal administration of either chloroprocaine or ropivacaine. Additional maternal and neonatal outcomes were also evaluatedResults The required time to achieve a T4 sensory block or a full motor block (Bromage 3) was no different between groups (p=0.459 and 0.360, respectively). However, group C presented with a significantly shorter sensory block duration (84.5±15.6 vs. 124.8±14.6, p<0.001) as well as motor block duration (71.5±13.1 vs. 96.3±20.7, p<0.001). Other outcomes were comparableConclusions Preliminary findings suggest that spinal chloroprocaine provides a faster recovery profile compared to ropivacaine, with comparable safety outcomes for both the mother and neonate. These characteristics may render chloroprocaine a viable alternative in obstetric anesthesia, particularly in settings requiring rapid offset of block and quick mobilization of the parturient.