Comparison between effects of Clonazepam and Dexmedetomidine as sedative in elective Caesarean section under Subarachnoid anaesthesia

M. E. Karim, Ram Mustafijur Rashid, Mohammad Saleh Akram Akram, R. Ershad, M. Kamal, M. Hassan
{"title":"Comparison between effects of Clonazepam and Dexmedetomidine as sedative in elective Caesarean section under Subarachnoid anaesthesia","authors":"M. E. Karim, Ram Mustafijur Rashid, Mohammad Saleh Akram Akram, R. Ershad, M. Kamal, M. Hassan","doi":"10.3329/jbsa.v35i2.67893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Regional anaesthesia has become an important anaesthetic technique now a days. Theuse of spinal (subarachnoid) anaesthesia is often limited by the unwillingness of patients to remainawake during surgery. Pharmacologically induced tranquility improves acceptance of regionaltechnique. This study compares Clonazepam and Dexmedetomidine in terms of onset and recovery ofsedation, haemodynamic effects, respiratory effects and adverse effects of both the drugs during electiveCaesarian section under spinal anaesthesia.\nMaterials and Methods: This randomized clinical trial included 60 ASA (American Society ofAnaesthesiologists) grade I patients between age 20-40 years undergoing elective Caesarean sectionsunder Subarachnoid anaesthesia during the period January 2022 to June 2022. Patients wererandomly allocated to one of two groups: Clonazepam group (Group C, n=30), who received Clonazepamin a single dose of 0.015mg/kg and Dexmedetomidine group (Group D, n=30), who receivedDexmedetomidine in a single dose of 2mcg/kg. Spinal anaesthesia was conducted by injecting ahyperbaric solution of 0.5% bupivacaine 3ml through a 25G spinal needle at L3-4 level. All parameterswere documented at 5 min intervals until arousal of the patient. The onset of sedation i.e. time from iv(intravenous) injection of Clonazepam or Dexmedetomidine to closure of eye lids (OAA/S score of 3) andthe arousal time from sedation i.e. time from closing of the eye lids to OAA/S score of 5 ( patient isawake clinically) were noted. Any complication during operation was documented. The patient’ssatisfaction with the sedation was assessed by the 5 point ‘Likert verbal rating scale.’\nResults: There was no significant difference of mean blood pressure and mean heart rate between thetwo groups at different time intervals (P>0.05). Time of onset of sedation was significantly delayed inDexmedetomidine group (P<0.05). Duration of sedation was comparable between the two groups (Pvalue 0.326). Incidence of peroperative complications were comparable between the two groups (P>0.05).\nConclusion: Although onset of sedation was significantly delayed in Dexmedetomidine group,duration of sedation was not significantly different between Clonazepam and Dexmedetomidine insingle dose technique for sedation during Caesarean section. Haemodynamic effects and adverse effectsof two drugs were comparable. Thus it is recommended that either Clonazepam or Dexmedetomidinecan be used for sedation during subarachnoid block for Caesarean section.\nJBSA 2022; 35 (2) : 30-36","PeriodicalId":17242,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bangladesh Society of Anaesthesiologists","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Bangladesh Society of Anaesthesiologists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3329/jbsa.v35i2.67893","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Regional anaesthesia has become an important anaesthetic technique now a days. Theuse of spinal (subarachnoid) anaesthesia is often limited by the unwillingness of patients to remainawake during surgery. Pharmacologically induced tranquility improves acceptance of regionaltechnique. This study compares Clonazepam and Dexmedetomidine in terms of onset and recovery ofsedation, haemodynamic effects, respiratory effects and adverse effects of both the drugs during electiveCaesarian section under spinal anaesthesia. Materials and Methods: This randomized clinical trial included 60 ASA (American Society ofAnaesthesiologists) grade I patients between age 20-40 years undergoing elective Caesarean sectionsunder Subarachnoid anaesthesia during the period January 2022 to June 2022. Patients wererandomly allocated to one of two groups: Clonazepam group (Group C, n=30), who received Clonazepamin a single dose of 0.015mg/kg and Dexmedetomidine group (Group D, n=30), who receivedDexmedetomidine in a single dose of 2mcg/kg. Spinal anaesthesia was conducted by injecting ahyperbaric solution of 0.5% bupivacaine 3ml through a 25G spinal needle at L3-4 level. All parameterswere documented at 5 min intervals until arousal of the patient. The onset of sedation i.e. time from iv(intravenous) injection of Clonazepam or Dexmedetomidine to closure of eye lids (OAA/S score of 3) andthe arousal time from sedation i.e. time from closing of the eye lids to OAA/S score of 5 ( patient isawake clinically) were noted. Any complication during operation was documented. The patient’ssatisfaction with the sedation was assessed by the 5 point ‘Likert verbal rating scale.’ Results: There was no significant difference of mean blood pressure and mean heart rate between thetwo groups at different time intervals (P>0.05). Time of onset of sedation was significantly delayed inDexmedetomidine group (P<0.05). Duration of sedation was comparable between the two groups (Pvalue 0.326). Incidence of peroperative complications were comparable between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion: Although onset of sedation was significantly delayed in Dexmedetomidine group,duration of sedation was not significantly different between Clonazepam and Dexmedetomidine insingle dose technique for sedation during Caesarean section. Haemodynamic effects and adverse effectsof two drugs were comparable. Thus it is recommended that either Clonazepam or Dexmedetomidinecan be used for sedation during subarachnoid block for Caesarean section. JBSA 2022; 35 (2) : 30-36
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
氯硝西泮与右美托咪定在蛛网膜下腔麻醉下择期剖宫产术中的镇静效果比较
背景:区域麻醉已成为一种重要的麻醉技术。脊髓(蛛网膜下腔)麻醉的使用通常因患者在手术过程中不愿意保持清醒而受到限制。药理学诱导的平静提高了局部技术的接受度。本研究比较氯硝西泮和右美托咪定在脊髓麻醉下选择性剖宫产时的镇静起效和恢复、血流动力学效应、呼吸效应和不良反应。材料和方法:该随机临床试验包括60例年龄在20-40岁之间的ASA(美国麻醉学会)I级患者,于2022年1月至2022年6月期间在蛛网膜下腔麻醉下进行选择性剖腹产。患者随机分为两组:氯硝西泮组(C组,n=30),给予氯硝西泮单次剂量0.015mg/kg;右美托咪定组(D组,n=30),给予右美托咪定单次剂量2mcg/kg。脊髓麻醉通过25G脊髓针在L3-4水平注射0.5%布比卡因3ml的超高压溶液。每隔5分钟记录一次所有参数,直到患者醒来。记录镇静的开始时间,即从静脉注射氯硝西泮或右美托咪定到闭眼(OAA/S评分为3)的时间,以及镇静的觉醒时间,即从闭眼到OAA/S评分为5(患者临床清醒)的时间。记录手术过程中任何并发症。采用李克特5分口头评定量表评估患者对镇静的满意度。结果:两组患者在不同时间间隔的平均血压、平均心率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。美托咪定组患者镇静起效时间明显延迟(P0.05)。结论:虽然右美托咪定组剖宫产术中单剂量镇静作用明显延迟,但氯硝西泮与右美托咪定在剖宫产术中镇静作用持续时间无显著差异。两种药物的血流动力学效应和不良反应具有可比性。因此,建议剖宫产术蛛网膜下腔阻滞时,氯硝西泮或右美托咪定均可用于镇静。JBSA 2022;35 (2): 30-36
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Premedication of Oral Clonidine 2mcg/kg and 4mcg/kg for Analgesic and Pressure Response During First Twenty-four Hours After Upper Abdominal Surgery: A Comparative Study Comparison between effects of Clonazepam and Dexmedetomidine as sedative in elective Caesarean section under Subarachnoid anaesthesia A Dose Response Study Of Oral clonidine as premedication in patients undergoing abdominal gynaecological surgery Blood Glucose Variability as a Predictor of Mortality for Septic Patients in Intensive Care Unit Postoperative pain relief in pediatric surgery patients: Effect of intravenous paracetamol in comparison with diclofenac suppository
×
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