The comparative effects of local anaesthetics on wound healing in rats: Bupivacaine vs Levobupivacaine

Yunus Oktay ATALAY

Makale detayları

The comparative effects of local anaesthetics on wound healing in rats: Bupivacaine vs Levobupivacaine

Yazarlar:

Yunus Oktay ATALAY

Yayıncı:

Ondokuz Mayıs University

Dergi:

Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine 2017 Vol.34 Issue 2, pp.157-158

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

9/2017

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2000508082

Sıklık:

Üç Aylık

eISSN:

1309-5129

pISSN:

1309-4483

Özet:

 


 Dear editor,

In our study entitled “The Comparative Effects

of Local Anaesthetics on Wound Healing in Rats:

Bupivacaine vs Levobupivacaine”, which has an

experimental protocol number of 11.2008.mar, we

considered a possible vasoconstrictive mechanism

of levobupivacaine in light of previous studies that

had investigated the vasoconstrictive potency of

levobupivacaine in the sciatica nerve, the aorta,

and the basilar artery of rats, and in humans during

tonsillectomy and nasal surgery (Bouaziz et al., 2005;

Demiraran et al., 2008; Ergil et al., 2012; Shim et al.,

2012; Ergil et al., 2015). All of these studies reported

a vasoconstrictive activity of levobupivacaine.

However, another study reported a vasodilator effect of

levobupivacaine in the rat mesenteric artery and was

published after the acceptance of our study (Menezes et

al., 2016). Furthermore, this study was the only studyreporting a vasodilator effect of levobupivacaine, while  the other five studies reported the opposite effect. This

suggests that more studies are needed to investigate the

vasoactivity of levobupivacaine.

We are thankful to the author for recognizing

the false information in Table 2. We performed

the statistical analyses (Kruskal-Wallis tests) of

epidermal regeneration, granulation tissue thickness

and angiogenesis in nine rats in the levobupivacaine

group (group L). However, while we mentioned this information in the article correctly, we incorrectly

stated it in Table 2 as n=10 instead of n=9. The other

information in Table 2 that was incorrect according to

the author was the p value. With regard to epidermal and

dermal regenerations, we determined no statistically significant differences in either the bupivacaine group

(group B) or the control group (group C). However, we

found a significantly lower score in group L with a p <

0.01, Therefore, we corrected Table 2 as shown below.


.

Makale detayları

The comparative effects of local anaesthetics on wound healing in rats: Bupivacaine vs Levobupivacaine

Yazarlar: Yunus Oktay ATALAY

Yayıncı: Ondokuz Mayıs University

Dergi: Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine 2017 Vol.34 Issue 2, pp.157-158

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 9/2017

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2000508082

Sıklık: Üç Aylık

eISSN: 1309-5129

pISSN: 1309-4483

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Yunus Oktay ATALAY

Yayıncı:

Ondokuz Mayıs University

Dergi:

Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine 2017 Vol.34 Issue 2, pp.157-158

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

9/2017

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2000508082

Sıklık:

Üç Aylık

eISSN:

1309-5129

pISSN:

1309-4483