Comparison of Different Doses of Dexmedetomidine as Adjuvant for Infraumbilical Surgery in Patients Receiving Bupivacaine Spinal Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Amit Kumar Saha, Bani P M Hembrom, Baisakhi Laha, T. Mitra, A. Hazra
{"title":"Comparison of Different Doses of Dexmedetomidine as Adjuvant for Infraumbilical Surgery in Patients Receiving Bupivacaine Spinal Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Amit Kumar Saha, Bani P M Hembrom, Baisakhi Laha, T. Mitra, A. Hazra","doi":"10.6859/aja.202206/PP.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nInfraumbilical surgery today is done preferentially under subarachnoid block. The relatively short duration of analgesia is a limiting factor which is overcome by adding an adjuvant to intrathecal bupivacaine. We aimed to determine optimum dose of intrathecal dexmedetomidine as adjuvant to 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine in infraumbilical surgery.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA parallel group, double blind, randomized controlled trial was done with 105 adult patients posted for infraumbilical surgery under subarachnoid block. All subjects received 3.0 mL (15.0 mg) of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine. Groups D5.0, D7.5, and D10.0 (n = 35 each) received additionally 5.0, 7.5, and 10.0 mcg intrathecal dexmedetomidine as adjuvant. The onset time of sensory block, its peak level and time to this level, maximum motor block and time to it, total duration of analgesia (time to first rescue), and vital parameters were recorded at intervals. Postoperative analgesia was assessed by visual analog scale score at 15 and 30 minutes, then every 30 minutes until 2 hours and then every hour until 6 hours. Treatment emergent adverse events (bradycardia, hypotension, and sedation) were documented.\n\n\nRESULTS\nMaximum sensory level achieved was higher in Group D10.0 than in the other two groups. There was significant and dose-dependent shortening of the mean time to peak sensory block (3.9, 3.3, and 2.9 min; P < 0.001) and peak motor block (5.6, 5.3, and 4.8 min; P < 0.001), and prolongation of postoperative analgesia duration (206.9, 220.8, and 244.0 min; P < 0.001) with escalating doses (5.0, 7.5, and 10.0 mcg, respectively) of dexmedetomidine. Hemodynamic effects and adverse events were comparable in the three groups.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nIntrathecal dexmedetomidine (10.0 mcg), as adjuvant to 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine (15.0 mg), facilitates rapid onset sensory and motor block and prolongs duration of postoperative analgesia in spinal anesthesia without significant adverse effects. Although absolute differences are modest, the results are better compared to 5.0 and 7.5 mcg doses.","PeriodicalId":8482,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6859/aja.202206/PP.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Infraumbilical surgery today is done preferentially under subarachnoid block. The relatively short duration of analgesia is a limiting factor which is overcome by adding an adjuvant to intrathecal bupivacaine. We aimed to determine optimum dose of intrathecal dexmedetomidine as adjuvant to 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine in infraumbilical surgery. METHODS A parallel group, double blind, randomized controlled trial was done with 105 adult patients posted for infraumbilical surgery under subarachnoid block. All subjects received 3.0 mL (15.0 mg) of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine. Groups D5.0, D7.5, and D10.0 (n = 35 each) received additionally 5.0, 7.5, and 10.0 mcg intrathecal dexmedetomidine as adjuvant. The onset time of sensory block, its peak level and time to this level, maximum motor block and time to it, total duration of analgesia (time to first rescue), and vital parameters were recorded at intervals. Postoperative analgesia was assessed by visual analog scale score at 15 and 30 minutes, then every 30 minutes until 2 hours and then every hour until 6 hours. Treatment emergent adverse events (bradycardia, hypotension, and sedation) were documented. RESULTS Maximum sensory level achieved was higher in Group D10.0 than in the other two groups. There was significant and dose-dependent shortening of the mean time to peak sensory block (3.9, 3.3, and 2.9 min; P < 0.001) and peak motor block (5.6, 5.3, and 4.8 min; P < 0.001), and prolongation of postoperative analgesia duration (206.9, 220.8, and 244.0 min; P < 0.001) with escalating doses (5.0, 7.5, and 10.0 mcg, respectively) of dexmedetomidine. Hemodynamic effects and adverse events were comparable in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS Intrathecal dexmedetomidine (10.0 mcg), as adjuvant to 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine (15.0 mg), facilitates rapid onset sensory and motor block and prolongs duration of postoperative analgesia in spinal anesthesia without significant adverse effects. Although absolute differences are modest, the results are better compared to 5.0 and 7.5 mcg doses.
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
不同剂量右美托咪定辅助布比卡因脊髓麻醉患者脐下手术的比较:一项随机对照试验。
背景:目前脐部手术优先在蛛网膜下腔阻滞下进行。镇痛持续时间相对较短是一个限制因素,可以通过在鞘内布比卡因中添加辅助剂来克服。我们的目的是确定脐下手术中鞘内右美托咪定辅助0.5%高压布比卡因的最佳剂量。方法采用平行组、双盲、随机对照试验方法,对105例拟行蛛网膜下腔阻滞下脐下手术的成人患者进行研究。所有受试者均接受3.0 mL (15.0 mg) 0.5%高压布比卡因。D5.0、D7.5和D10.0组(n = 35)分别给予5.0、7.5和10.0 mcg鞘内右美托咪定辅助治疗。每隔一段时间记录感觉阻滞的发生时间、高峰水平及到达高峰时间、最大运动阻滞及到达高峰时间、总镇痛时间(至首次抢救时间)及生命参数。术后15分钟和30分钟分别用视觉模拟量表评分,然后每30分钟至2小时,再每小时至6小时。记录了治疗中出现的不良事件(心动过缓、低血压和镇静)。结果D10.0组的最大感觉水平高于其他两组。达到感觉阻滞峰值的平均时间缩短具有显著的剂量依赖性(3.9、3.3和2.9分钟);P < 0.001)和峰值运动阻滞(5.6、5.3和4.8 min;P < 0.001),术后镇痛时间延长(206.9、220.8和244.0 min;P < 0.001),随着右美托咪定剂量的增加(分别为5.0、7.5和10.0 mcg)。三组的血流动力学效应和不良事件具有可比性。结论经鞘内右美托咪定(10.0 mcg)辅助0.5%高压布比卡因(15.0 mg)可促进快速起效的感觉和运动阻滞,延长脊髓麻醉术后镇痛时间,无明显不良反应。虽然绝对差异不大,但与5.0微克和7.5微克剂量相比,结果要好一些。
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
Asian journal of anesthesiology
Asian journal of anesthesiology Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Asian Journal of Anesthesiology (AJA), launched in 1962, is the official and peer-reviewed publication of the Taiwan Society of Anaesthesiologists. It is published quarterly (March/June/September/December) by Airiti and indexed in EMBASE, Medline, Scopus, ScienceDirect, SIIC Data Bases. AJA accepts submissions from around the world. AJA is the premier open access journal in the field of anaesthesia and its related disciplines of critical care and pain in Asia. The number of Chinese anaesthesiologists has reached more than 60,000 and is still growing. The journal aims to disseminate anaesthesiology research and services for the Chinese community and is now the main anaesthesiology journal for Chinese societies located in Taiwan, Mainland China, Hong Kong and Singapore. AJAcaters to clinicians of all relevant specialties and biomedical scientists working in the areas of anesthesia, critical care medicine and pain management, as well as other related fields (pharmacology, pathology molecular biology, etc). AJA''s editorial team is composed of local and regional experts in the field as well as many leading international experts. Article types accepted include review articles, research papers, short communication, correspondence and images.
期刊最新文献
Four Approaches of Styletubation for Handling the Orotracheal Intubation: A Technical Tip. Risk of Dementia After Uterus or Prostate Resection: 17-Year Follow-Up of a Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study. Comparison of Inter-Incisor Distance as a Predictor of Difficult Intubation in Men and Women-A Prospective Observational Study. Deteriorating Hypotension and Trepopnea During Left Lateral Decubitus Position Before Spinal Anesthesia. Practice Algorithm of Rotational Thromboelastometry-Guided (ROTEM-Guided) Bleeding Management in Liver Transplantation.
×
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