The perioperative analgesic effect of opioid free anesthesia using combination of dexmedetomidine, ketamine and lidocaine in adolescent patients undergoing Scoliosis Surgery; A randomized Controlled Trial

IF 0.6 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2023-07-27 DOI:10.1080/11101849.2023.2239034
Laila Elahwal, M. Elmazny, S. Elrahwan
{"title":"The perioperative analgesic effect of opioid free anesthesia using combination of dexmedetomidine, ketamine and lidocaine in adolescent patients undergoing Scoliosis Surgery; A randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"Laila Elahwal, M. Elmazny, S. Elrahwan","doi":"10.1080/11101849.2023.2239034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Posterior spinal fusion treatment is one of the most painful options accessible to teenagers with idiopathic scoliosis. Objectives This study evaluated the opioid-sparing anesthesia analgesic effect using a combination of dexmedetomidine, ketamine and lidocaine versus opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) with fentanyl in adolescent patients undergoing scoliosis surgery. Methods This prospective, double-blinded, randomized study was conducted on 50 patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical state I–II, scheduled for surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis under general anesthesia. Patients were equally categorized into two groups: group I – opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) and group II – OBA. Intraoperative magnesium, total postoperative morphine consumption, time to first postoperative rescue analgesia and adverse effects were recorded. Results Total postoperative morphine consumption at 24 h was insignificantly different between groups. The proportion of patients requiring intraoperative magnesium was significantly higher in OBA (P < 0.001). Visual analog scale was only significant at 1 and 2 h which was significantly higher in group OBA than group OFA (P = 0.012 and < 0.001, respectively). Time to first postoperative rescue analgesia was significantly earlier in OBA than in OFA. Hemodynamic stability was insignificantly different between both groups. Bradycardia, postoperative nausea and vomiting and respiratory depression were insignificantly different between groups. Conclusions In adolescent patients ASA I-II undergoing scoliosis correction surgery, OFA with a combination of dexmedetomidine, ketamine and lidocaine could provide adequate intra- and postoperative pain management, which can obviate the use of intraoperative opioids minimizing the total postoperative opioid requirements compared to OBA using fentanyl.","PeriodicalId":11437,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11101849.2023.2239034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Posterior spinal fusion treatment is one of the most painful options accessible to teenagers with idiopathic scoliosis. Objectives This study evaluated the opioid-sparing anesthesia analgesic effect using a combination of dexmedetomidine, ketamine and lidocaine versus opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) with fentanyl in adolescent patients undergoing scoliosis surgery. Methods This prospective, double-blinded, randomized study was conducted on 50 patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical state I–II, scheduled for surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis under general anesthesia. Patients were equally categorized into two groups: group I – opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) and group II – OBA. Intraoperative magnesium, total postoperative morphine consumption, time to first postoperative rescue analgesia and adverse effects were recorded. Results Total postoperative morphine consumption at 24 h was insignificantly different between groups. The proportion of patients requiring intraoperative magnesium was significantly higher in OBA (P < 0.001). Visual analog scale was only significant at 1 and 2 h which was significantly higher in group OBA than group OFA (P = 0.012 and < 0.001, respectively). Time to first postoperative rescue analgesia was significantly earlier in OBA than in OFA. Hemodynamic stability was insignificantly different between both groups. Bradycardia, postoperative nausea and vomiting and respiratory depression were insignificantly different between groups. Conclusions In adolescent patients ASA I-II undergoing scoliosis correction surgery, OFA with a combination of dexmedetomidine, ketamine and lidocaine could provide adequate intra- and postoperative pain management, which can obviate the use of intraoperative opioids minimizing the total postoperative opioid requirements compared to OBA using fentanyl.
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
目的观察右美托咪定、氯胺酮和利多卡因联合应用无阿片类药物麻醉对青少年脊柱侧凸患者围手术期的镇痛作用;一项随机对照试验
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
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia
Egyptian Journal of Anaesthesia Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
78
期刊最新文献
Intrathecal levo-bupivacaine versus hyperbaric bupivacaine for inguinal hernia repairs in ex-preterm infants: A double blinded randomized prospective study Comparison of two different methods as reliable predictors of successful caudal block in children Effect of sevoflurane versus propofol on early cognitive functions in elderly patients after lumbar disc surgery Muscle wasting assessed by ultrasound versus scoring systems as early predictor of outcomes of intensive care unit stay in critically ill patients Posterior quadratus lumborum versus caudal epidural block for perioperative analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing upper abdominal surgeries: Arandomized, double-blind trial
×
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