右美托咪定与克拉定作为0.75%罗哌卡因辅助治疗超声引导锁骨上臂丛阻滞的前瞻性随机对照研究

Gajanan Fultambkar, Pradeepa Chavla, Vijayanand Budi, R. Gurram, V. Kukreja, Abhijit S. Nair
{"title":"右美托咪定与克拉定作为0.75%罗哌卡因辅助治疗超声引导锁骨上臂丛阻滞的前瞻性随机对照研究","authors":"Gajanan Fultambkar, Pradeepa Chavla, Vijayanand Budi, R. Gurram, V. Kukreja, Abhijit S. Nair","doi":"10.4103/roaic.roaic_11_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Alpha-2 agonists are popular adjuvants used in neuraxial anesthesia like spinal, epidural, caudal anesthesia, and peripheral nerve blocks. The authors compared the efficacy of clonidine with dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to ultrasound (US)-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block in adult patients undergoing elective upper limb surgeries. Materials and methods After obtaining Ethics Committee approval, 60 American Society of Anesthesiologists’- physical status (ASA-PS) I/II patients were randomized into two groups. Group Clonidine-Ropivacaine (CR) received 1 μg/kg clonidine as an adjuvant and group Dexmedetomidine-Ropivacaine (DR) received 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine. Patients received an ipsilateral US-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block with 0.75% ropivacaine (total volume of 20 ml). Demographic data, hemodynamics, the onset of block (sensory, motor), the duration of block (sensory, motor), duration of analgesia and surgery, total number of rescue analgesics, numerical rating scores, and Ramsay sedation score were compared between both groups using appropriate statistical tests. Results Heart rates at 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, and 3 h were lower in group DR compared with group CR, which was statistically significant (P=0.0001, 0.0001, 0.021, and 0.026, respectively). The onset of sensory and motor block, duration of sensory and motor block, and duration of analgesia were better in group DR compared with CR, which was statistically significant (P=0.00). The number of rescue analgesics required in group CR in both groups was comparable (P=0.057). Numeric rating scale scores at 12, 18, and 24 h were significantly better in group DR compared with group CR (P=0.0001, 0.039, and 0.036, respectively). Conclusion When added as an adjuvant to 0.75% ropivacaine in the US-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus, dexmedetomidine block produced faster onset of sensory and motor blockade, prolonged the duration of sensory and motor blockade, and also prolonged the duration of analgesia, when compared with clonidine.","PeriodicalId":151256,"journal":{"name":"Research and Opinion in Anesthesia and Intensive Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A prospective randomized comparative study of dexmedetomidine versus clonidine as an adjunct to 0.75% ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block\",\"authors\":\"Gajanan Fultambkar, Pradeepa Chavla, Vijayanand Budi, R. Gurram, V. Kukreja, Abhijit S. Nair\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/roaic.roaic_11_21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction Alpha-2 agonists are popular adjuvants used in neuraxial anesthesia like spinal, epidural, caudal anesthesia, and peripheral nerve blocks. The authors compared the efficacy of clonidine with dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to ultrasound (US)-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block in adult patients undergoing elective upper limb surgeries. Materials and methods After obtaining Ethics Committee approval, 60 American Society of Anesthesiologists’- physical status (ASA-PS) I/II patients were randomized into two groups. Group Clonidine-Ropivacaine (CR) received 1 μg/kg clonidine as an adjuvant and group Dexmedetomidine-Ropivacaine (DR) received 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine. Patients received an ipsilateral US-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block with 0.75% ropivacaine (total volume of 20 ml). Demographic data, hemodynamics, the onset of block (sensory, motor), the duration of block (sensory, motor), duration of analgesia and surgery, total number of rescue analgesics, numerical rating scores, and Ramsay sedation score were compared between both groups using appropriate statistical tests. Results Heart rates at 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, and 3 h were lower in group DR compared with group CR, which was statistically significant (P=0.0001, 0.0001, 0.021, and 0.026, respectively). The onset of sensory and motor block, duration of sensory and motor block, and duration of analgesia were better in group DR compared with CR, which was statistically significant (P=0.00). The number of rescue analgesics required in group CR in both groups was comparable (P=0.057). Numeric rating scale scores at 12, 18, and 24 h were significantly better in group DR compared with group CR (P=0.0001, 0.039, and 0.036, respectively). Conclusion When added as an adjuvant to 0.75% ropivacaine in the US-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus, dexmedetomidine block produced faster onset of sensory and motor blockade, prolonged the duration of sensory and motor blockade, and also prolonged the duration of analgesia, when compared with clonidine.\",\"PeriodicalId\":151256,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research and Opinion in Anesthesia and Intensive Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research and Opinion in Anesthesia and Intensive Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/roaic.roaic_11_21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research and Opinion in Anesthesia and Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/roaic.roaic_11_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

α -2激动剂是脊髓、硬膜外麻醉、尾侧麻醉和周围神经阻滞等神经轴麻醉中常用的佐剂。作者比较了克拉定和右美托咪定作为超声(US)引导下锁骨上臂丛阻滞的辅助治疗在选择性上肢手术的成年患者中的疗效。材料与方法60例美国麻醉医师协会(ASA-PS) I/II级患者经伦理委员会批准后,随机分为两组。可乐定-罗哌卡因组(CR)给予1 μg/kg可乐定辅助治疗,右美托咪定-罗哌卡因组(DR)给予1 μg/kg右美托咪定辅助治疗。患者接受同侧us引导锁骨上臂丛阻滞,0.75%罗哌卡因(总容积20ml)。采用统计学检验比较两组患者的人口学资料、血流动力学、阻滞发生(感觉、运动)、阻滞持续时间(感觉、运动)、镇痛和手术持续时间、抢救镇痛药物总数、数值评定评分和Ramsay镇静评分。结果DR组30 min、60 min、2 h、3 h心率均低于CR组,差异有统计学意义(P分别为0.0001、0.0001、0.021、0.026)。DR组感觉和运动阻滞发作、感觉和运动阻滞持续时间、镇痛持续时间均优于CR组,差异有统计学意义(P=0.00)。两组CR组所需抢救镇痛药数量具有可比性(P=0.057)。DR组在12、18、24 h的数值评定量表得分明显优于CR组(P分别为0.0001、0.039、0.036)。结论0.75%罗哌卡因在us引导锁骨上臂丛阻滞中加入右美托咪定阻滞后,与克拉定相比,右美托咪定阻滞的感觉和运动阻滞起效更快,感觉和运动阻滞持续时间延长,镇痛持续时间也延长。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A prospective randomized comparative study of dexmedetomidine versus clonidine as an adjunct to 0.75% ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block
Introduction Alpha-2 agonists are popular adjuvants used in neuraxial anesthesia like spinal, epidural, caudal anesthesia, and peripheral nerve blocks. The authors compared the efficacy of clonidine with dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to ultrasound (US)-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block in adult patients undergoing elective upper limb surgeries. Materials and methods After obtaining Ethics Committee approval, 60 American Society of Anesthesiologists’- physical status (ASA-PS) I/II patients were randomized into two groups. Group Clonidine-Ropivacaine (CR) received 1 μg/kg clonidine as an adjuvant and group Dexmedetomidine-Ropivacaine (DR) received 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine. Patients received an ipsilateral US-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block with 0.75% ropivacaine (total volume of 20 ml). Demographic data, hemodynamics, the onset of block (sensory, motor), the duration of block (sensory, motor), duration of analgesia and surgery, total number of rescue analgesics, numerical rating scores, and Ramsay sedation score were compared between both groups using appropriate statistical tests. Results Heart rates at 30 min, 60 min, 2 h, and 3 h were lower in group DR compared with group CR, which was statistically significant (P=0.0001, 0.0001, 0.021, and 0.026, respectively). The onset of sensory and motor block, duration of sensory and motor block, and duration of analgesia were better in group DR compared with CR, which was statistically significant (P=0.00). The number of rescue analgesics required in group CR in both groups was comparable (P=0.057). Numeric rating scale scores at 12, 18, and 24 h were significantly better in group DR compared with group CR (P=0.0001, 0.039, and 0.036, respectively). Conclusion When added as an adjuvant to 0.75% ropivacaine in the US-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus, dexmedetomidine block produced faster onset of sensory and motor blockade, prolonged the duration of sensory and motor blockade, and also prolonged the duration of analgesia, when compared with clonidine.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness of combined pulsed radiofrequency and steroid injection to the dorsal root ganglion in the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia: a prospective randomized clinical trial Sacrococcygeal local anesthesia versus spinal anesthesia for pilonidal sinus surgery: a prospective randomized controlled study Role of enteral metoprolol tartrate on hemodynamics and clinical outcomes of septic shock patients of various pretargeted heart rate groups Prediction of protective lung tidal volume using the ulna length in Egyptian adults Characteristics and clinical outcomes of critically ill pregnant patients with COVID-19 disease
×
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