Dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl as adjuvant to epidural 0.5% levobupivacaine for transurethral prostate resection in elderly patients: a comparative evaluation

K. Gupta, P. Gupta, Bhawana Rastogi, Manish Jain, D. Sharma, M. Pandey
{"title":"Dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl as adjuvant to epidural 0.5% levobupivacaine for transurethral prostate resection in elderly patients: a comparative evaluation","authors":"K. Gupta, P. Gupta, Bhawana Rastogi, Manish Jain, D. Sharma, M. Pandey","doi":"10.4103/1687-7934.189092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Regional anesthesia is the technique of choice for patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), but anesthetic management of elderly patients is challenging due to compromised organ function. The present study aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl in the enhancement of the quality and duration of epidural anesthesia with 0.5% levobupivacaine and hemodynamic stability during TURP in elderly patients. Patients and methods Sixty elderly consented patients were randomized into two equal groups of 30 patients each in a double-blind manner. They were given 15 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine (75 mg) either with 1 ml (50 μg) dexmedetomidine (group LD) or with 1 ml (50 μg) fentanyl (group LF) using an epidural catheter. The primary endpoints were the onset and duration of sensory and motor blockade, duration of sensory analgesia, hemodynamic variability, respiratory adequacy, and any adverse effect. Results Demographic data were comparable in both groups. Onset of sensory and motor blockade was faster in patients of group LD than in patients of group LF, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). Duration of motor blockade and sensory analgesia was longer in patients of group LD than in patients of group LF (P < 0.05). Intraoperative heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure were significantly lower in patients of group LD, but no intervention was required. Surgical bleeding was reduced in patients of group LD. Conclusion Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to epidural levobupivacaine for TURP has shortened onset time of anesthesia and prolonged duration of sensory analgesia. The surgical field vision was improved due to reduced bleeding.","PeriodicalId":7492,"journal":{"name":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/1687-7934.189092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background Regional anesthesia is the technique of choice for patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), but anesthetic management of elderly patients is challenging due to compromised organ function. The present study aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl in the enhancement of the quality and duration of epidural anesthesia with 0.5% levobupivacaine and hemodynamic stability during TURP in elderly patients. Patients and methods Sixty elderly consented patients were randomized into two equal groups of 30 patients each in a double-blind manner. They were given 15 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine (75 mg) either with 1 ml (50 μg) dexmedetomidine (group LD) or with 1 ml (50 μg) fentanyl (group LF) using an epidural catheter. The primary endpoints were the onset and duration of sensory and motor blockade, duration of sensory analgesia, hemodynamic variability, respiratory adequacy, and any adverse effect. Results Demographic data were comparable in both groups. Onset of sensory and motor blockade was faster in patients of group LD than in patients of group LF, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05). Duration of motor blockade and sensory analgesia was longer in patients of group LD than in patients of group LF (P < 0.05). Intraoperative heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure were significantly lower in patients of group LD, but no intervention was required. Surgical bleeding was reduced in patients of group LD. Conclusion Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to epidural levobupivacaine for TURP has shortened onset time of anesthesia and prolonged duration of sensory analgesia. The surgical field vision was improved due to reduced bleeding.
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
右美托咪定与芬太尼作为辅助硬膜外0.5%左布比卡因用于老年患者经尿道前列腺切除术的比较评价
背景区域麻醉是经尿道前列腺切除术(TURP)患者的首选技术,但由于器官功能受损,老年患者的麻醉管理具有挑战性。本研究旨在评价右美托咪定与芬太尼在提高0.5%左布比卡因硬膜外麻醉质量和持续时间以及老年患者TURP期间血流动力学稳定性方面的相对有效性和安全性。患者与方法采用双盲方法,将60例老年患者随机分为两组,每组30例。经硬膜外导管给予15 ml 0.5%左布比卡因(75 mg)与1 ml (50 μg)右美托咪定(LD组)或1 ml (50 μg)芬太尼(LF组)。主要终点是感觉和运动阻断的开始和持续时间,感觉镇痛的持续时间,血流动力学变异性,呼吸充分性和任何不良反应。结果两组人口统计学数据具有可比性。LD组感觉及运动阻滞发作速度快于LF组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。LD组运动阻滞和感觉镇痛持续时间明显长于LF组(P < 0.05)。LD组患者术中心率和平均动脉血压明显降低,但不需要干预。结论右美托咪定辅助硬膜外左布比卡因治疗TURP可缩短麻醉起效时间,延长感觉镇痛时间。手术视野因出血减少而改善。
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
Management of early postoperative hypoxemia: a comparative performance of Hudson face mask with nasal prongs Aprepitant for attenuation of postoperative nausea and vomiting with a decrease in postoperative analgesic needs after laparoscopic surgery Awake orotracheal intubation using fiberoptic bronchoscope versus Airtraq laryngoscope in morbidly obese patients Tramadol versus hyoscine-N-butylbromide as intrapartum analgesics during the first stage of labor Effect of dexmedetomidine infusion on desflurane requirement and perioperative hemodynamic changes during laparoscopic gastric sleeve operations: a study based on entropy
×
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