Comparative Study Between Intravenous Clonidine and Preservative Free Intravenous Lignocaine in Attenuation of Pressor Response to Laryngoscopy and Endotracheal Intubation

IF 0.4 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Journal of Pharmacology & Pharmacotherapeutics Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1177/0976500X221148539
S. T. Vazhakalayil, Shahbaz Haroon
{"title":"Comparative Study Between Intravenous Clonidine and Preservative Free Intravenous Lignocaine in Attenuation of Pressor Response to Laryngoscopy and Endotracheal Intubation","authors":"S. T. Vazhakalayil, Shahbaz Haroon","doi":"10.1177/0976500X221148539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives To compare the attenuation of pressor responses by intravenous clonidine and preservative-free lignocaine to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. Materials and Methods A randomized, prospective, comparative, double-blinded study was conducted in 80 adult patients who were randomized into two groups of 40 each, group clonidine (Group C) and group lignocaine (Group L). Group C patients were given 2 µg/kg clonidine in 20 ml of normal saline as a slow infusion over 10 min prior to intubation. Group L patients were given 1.5 mg/kg of preservative-free 2% lignocaine in 20 ml of normal saline as a single-dose infusion over 3 min prior to intubation. Baseline vital and hemodynamic parameters were monitored during the perioperative period at 1-, 5-, and 10-min post-intubation. Results The attenuation of heart rate (HR) after intubation was much better with clonidine than lignocaine as there is statistically significant difference in the mean HR between the two groups at 1, 5, and 10 min after intubation with the HR significantly lesser in the Group C than the Group L at all times after intubation. Both clonidine and lignocaine were effective in attenuating systolic blood pressure response after intubation, but clonidine was more effective than lignocaine as systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) in the Group C remained much lower than the Group L and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant at all times after intubation. Conclusion Premedicating with a single slow infusion of 2 µg/kg i.v. clonidine has been proven to be effective in maintaining perioperative hemodynamic stability at 1, 5, and 10 min post-intubation than lignocaine.","PeriodicalId":16761,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacology & Pharmacotherapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacology & Pharmacotherapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0976500X221148539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives To compare the attenuation of pressor responses by intravenous clonidine and preservative-free lignocaine to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. Materials and Methods A randomized, prospective, comparative, double-blinded study was conducted in 80 adult patients who were randomized into two groups of 40 each, group clonidine (Group C) and group lignocaine (Group L). Group C patients were given 2 µg/kg clonidine in 20 ml of normal saline as a slow infusion over 10 min prior to intubation. Group L patients were given 1.5 mg/kg of preservative-free 2% lignocaine in 20 ml of normal saline as a single-dose infusion over 3 min prior to intubation. Baseline vital and hemodynamic parameters were monitored during the perioperative period at 1-, 5-, and 10-min post-intubation. Results The attenuation of heart rate (HR) after intubation was much better with clonidine than lignocaine as there is statistically significant difference in the mean HR between the two groups at 1, 5, and 10 min after intubation with the HR significantly lesser in the Group C than the Group L at all times after intubation. Both clonidine and lignocaine were effective in attenuating systolic blood pressure response after intubation, but clonidine was more effective than lignocaine as systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) in the Group C remained much lower than the Group L and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant at all times after intubation. Conclusion Premedicating with a single slow infusion of 2 µg/kg i.v. clonidine has been proven to be effective in maintaining perioperative hemodynamic stability at 1, 5, and 10 min post-intubation than lignocaine.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
可乐定与不含防腐剂的利多卡因静脉滴注对喉镜和气管插管压力反应的比较研究
目的比较静脉注射可乐定和不含防腐剂的利多卡因对喉镜和气管插管压迫反应的衰减。材料和方法对80名成年患者进行随机、前瞻性、对比、双盲研究,他们被随机分为两组,每组40人,可乐定组(C组)和利多卡因组(L组)。C组患者在插管前10分钟内缓慢输注20 ml生理盐水中的2µg/kg可乐定。L组患者在插管前3分钟内接受1.5mg/kg不含防腐剂的2%利多卡因在20ml生理盐水中的单剂量输注。在插管后1、5和10分钟的围手术期监测基线生命和血液动力学参数。结果可乐定对插管后心率(HR)的衰减比利多卡因好得多,因为在插管后1、5和10分钟,两组之间的平均HR存在统计学显著差异,C组在插管后所有时间的HR均显著低于L组。可乐定和利多卡因均能有效减轻插管后的收缩压反应,但可乐定在收缩压(SBP)、舒张压(DBP),C组的平均动脉压(MAP)仍远低于L组,并且两组之间在插管后的所有时间的差异具有统计学意义。结论与利多卡因相比,单次缓慢输注2µg/kg静脉注射可乐定在插管后1、5和10分钟的围手术期血液动力学稳定性方面是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊最新文献
Allelic Variants in the Warfarin-related Genes VKORC1 and CYP2C9 in a Western Saudi Population N-Acetyl-l-Cysteine Ameliorations RenalFunction Early After Renal Ischemia and Reperfusion; it is not Protective over a LongTerm under a High-Sodium Diet in Rats Rationalization of Antibiotic Prescription: Modulation of the Gut Microbiome and Possibilities of Minimizing the Risks for the Development of Antibiotic Resistance—A Narrative Review The Science of Antioxidants: Balancing thePros and Cons for Our Health Use of Fixed-dose Combination Therapy with Remogliflozin and Vildagliptin as an Add-on Drug in Improving the Glycemic Control of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: An Observational Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1