Addition of dexmedetomidine and nalbuphine as an adjuvant to ketofol for deep sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study

IF 0.2 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY Indian Anaesthetists Forum Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.4103/theiaforum.theiaforum_69_21
Chhabra Alka, Karuna Sharma, Neelam Chaudhary, Milan Dave, N. Pandey, Sunanda Gupta
{"title":"Addition of dexmedetomidine and nalbuphine as an adjuvant to ketofol for deep sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study","authors":"Chhabra Alka, Karuna Sharma, Neelam Chaudhary, Milan Dave, N. Pandey, Sunanda Gupta","doi":"10.4103/theiaforum.theiaforum_69_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Deep sedation has evolved as a better choice against general anesthesia in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and nalbuphine as an adjuvant to ketofol based deep sedation in ERCP. Methods: One hundred patients undergoing ERCP were randomly assigned to receive either IV dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg (Group D, n = 50) or I. V nalbuphine 0.1 μg/kg (Group N, n = 50), 10 min before ketofol induction. The primary outcome was the total dose of ketofol used for induction and maintenance of deep sedation throughout the procedure. Hemodynamics and respiratory parameters, recovery characteristics, endoscopist's, and anesthetist satisfaction scores were secondary outcomes. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The dose of ketofol at the time of induction was significantly high in Group N as compared to Group D (P < 0.05). Supplemental dose of ketofol at the time of insertion of endoscope was equivalent in both the groups (P > 0.05) but significantly more number of patients in Group D (n = 19 vs. n = 11, P < 0.05) received supplement for facial pain score >5 compared to patients in Group N, where more patients received supplement for Ramsay Sedation Score <3 (n = 20 vs. n = 11 P < 0.05). Significant decrease in heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure from baseline values was found in Group D as compared to Group N (P < 0.001). Group N patients achieved postanesthesia recovery score >12 earlier than Group D (P < 0.001). Anesthetist satisfaction score was more in Group N (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine reduces the total consumption of ketofol and provides smooth hemodynamics whereas Nalbuphine provides better analgesia and early recovery with high anesthetist satisfaction for deep sedation in ERCP.","PeriodicalId":42359,"journal":{"name":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","volume":"23 1","pages":"31 - 37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Anaesthetists Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/theiaforum.theiaforum_69_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Deep sedation has evolved as a better choice against general anesthesia in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and nalbuphine as an adjuvant to ketofol based deep sedation in ERCP. Methods: One hundred patients undergoing ERCP were randomly assigned to receive either IV dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg (Group D, n = 50) or I. V nalbuphine 0.1 μg/kg (Group N, n = 50), 10 min before ketofol induction. The primary outcome was the total dose of ketofol used for induction and maintenance of deep sedation throughout the procedure. Hemodynamics and respiratory parameters, recovery characteristics, endoscopist's, and anesthetist satisfaction scores were secondary outcomes. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The dose of ketofol at the time of induction was significantly high in Group N as compared to Group D (P < 0.05). Supplemental dose of ketofol at the time of insertion of endoscope was equivalent in both the groups (P > 0.05) but significantly more number of patients in Group D (n = 19 vs. n = 11, P < 0.05) received supplement for facial pain score >5 compared to patients in Group N, where more patients received supplement for Ramsay Sedation Score <3 (n = 20 vs. n = 11 P < 0.05). Significant decrease in heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure from baseline values was found in Group D as compared to Group N (P < 0.001). Group N patients achieved postanesthesia recovery score >12 earlier than Group D (P < 0.001). Anesthetist satisfaction score was more in Group N (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine reduces the total consumption of ketofol and provides smooth hemodynamics whereas Nalbuphine provides better analgesia and early recovery with high anesthetist satisfaction for deep sedation in ERCP.
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
在内镜逆行胆管造影中,右美托咪定和纳布啡辅助酮酚进行深度镇静:一项前瞻性、随机、双盲研究
背景:在接受内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)的患者中,深度镇静已成为一种比全身麻醉更好的选择。本研究旨在评估右美托咪定和那尔布芬作为酮基深度镇静辅助药物在ERCP中的疗效。方法:100例接受ERCP的患者随机分为两组,一组接受静脉注射右美托咪定1μg/kg(D组,n=50),另一组接受I.V那尔布芬0.1μg/kg(n组,n=5 0)。主要结果是在整个手术过程中用于诱导和维持深度镇静的酮醇的总剂量。血液动力学和呼吸参数、恢复特征、内镜医生和麻醉师满意度评分是次要结果。P<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。结果:与D组相比,N组诱导时的酮醇剂量显著较高(P<0.05)。插入内窥镜时酮醇的补充剂量在两组中是相等的(P>0.05),但与N组相比,D组接受面部疼痛评分>5的补充的患者明显更多(N=19 vs.N=11,P<0.05,其中更多的患者比D组更早接受Ramsay镇静评分12的补充(P<0.001)。N组的麻醉师满意度评分更高(P<0.05)。
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
Indian Anaesthetists Forum
Indian Anaesthetists Forum ANESTHESIOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Cardiovascular complications in coronavirus disease-2019 patients Refractory hypokalemia in intensive care unit: Efforts in vain Evaluation of effect of dexamethasone and bicarbonate as adjuvants to intracuff lignocaine on endotracheal tube tolerance during emergence and incidence of postoperative cough and sore throat Is it popliteal artery? Is it popliteal vein? No it is persistent sciatic vein Mortality predictors during the third wave of COVID-19 pandemic: A multicentric retrospective analysis from tertiary care centers of Western India
×
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