右美托咪定在日常麻醉中的sedo镇痛:一项前瞻性随机对照试验。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY BMC Anesthesiology Pub Date : 2025-01-29 DOI:10.1186/s12871-025-02918-1
Ali Kendal Oğuz, Celaleddin Soyalp, Yunus Emre Tunçdemir, Arzu Esen Tekeli, Nureddin Yüzkat
{"title":"右美托咪定在日常麻醉中的sedo镇痛:一项前瞻性随机对照试验。","authors":"Ali Kendal Oğuz, Celaleddin Soyalp, Yunus Emre Tunçdemir, Arzu Esen Tekeli, Nureddin Yüzkat","doi":"10.1186/s12871-025-02918-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient safety is important in daily anesthesia practices, and providing deep anesthesia is difficult. Current debates on the optimal anesthetic agents highlight the need for safer alternatives. This study was justified by the need for safer and more effective anesthetic protocols for outpatient hysteroscopic procedures, particularly those conducted outside the operating room. Propofol, while widely used, has significant limitations, including respiratory depression, hemodynamic instability, and delayed recovery when higher doses are required for adequate sedation. The addition of opioids to propofol, though beneficial for analgesia, introduces risks such as hypoxemia and hypotension. These challenges necessitate exploring alternative combinations that balance sedation depth with fewer side effects.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the efficacy and safety of deep sedoanalgesia achieved with dexmedetomidine-propofol versus remifentanil-propofol combinations in daily anesthesia practices.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective randomized clinical study.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>This study was carried out at Dursun Odabaş Medical Center.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Eighty ASA I-II patients, aged 18-65, scheduled for elective hysteroscopic interventions under sedoanalgesia were included in the study.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary aim of our study was to identify an anesthetic agent combination capable of delivering effective and safe deep sedation, with sedation depth assessed via the Ramsey Sedation Score (RSS) and respiratory safety evaluated through desaturation rates. Secondary endpoints included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, oxygen saturation (SpO2), patient, surgeon, and anesthesiologist satisfaction scores, hemodynamic parameters, the time to achieve an RSS > 4, the time to reach a Modified Aldrete Score (MAS) > 9, and the requirement for mask ventilation and jaw thrust maneuvers.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Patients were randomized into two groups (n = 40 each): Group DP (Dexmedetomidine-Propofol): A bolus of 1 mg/kg IV propofol and 1 mcg/kg IV dexmedetomidine over 10 min, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.2-1.4 mcg/kg/hour. Group RP (Remifentanil-Propofol): A bolus of 1 mg/kg IV propofol and 0.25 mcg/kg IV remifentanil, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.025-0.1 mcg/kg/minute.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients in the DP group exhibited significantly lower VAS scores and desaturation rates (p = 0.003) compared to the RP group. Satisfaction scores (patient, surgeon, anesthesiologist) and integrated pulmonary index (IPI) values were significantly higher in the DP group (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The dexmedetomidine-propofol combination is an effective and safe anesthetic regimen for deep sedation in outpatient hysteroscopic procedures, offering adequate sedation and superior preservation of respiratory function. Additionally, the dexmedetomidine-propofol combination ensures more stable hemodynamics, with a lower incidence of hypoxia, and results in higher satisfaction rates among patients, surgeons, and anesthesiologists.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinical Trials ID is NCT05674201 Date 2022.12.07.</p>","PeriodicalId":9190,"journal":{"name":"BMC Anesthesiology","volume":"25 1","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11776121/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sedoanalgesia with dexmedetomidine in daily anesthesia practices: a prospective randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Ali Kendal Oğuz, Celaleddin Soyalp, Yunus Emre Tunçdemir, Arzu Esen Tekeli, Nureddin Yüzkat\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12871-025-02918-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient safety is important in daily anesthesia practices, and providing deep anesthesia is difficult. Current debates on the optimal anesthetic agents highlight the need for safer alternatives. This study was justified by the need for safer and more effective anesthetic protocols for outpatient hysteroscopic procedures, particularly those conducted outside the operating room. Propofol, while widely used, has significant limitations, including respiratory depression, hemodynamic instability, and delayed recovery when higher doses are required for adequate sedation. The addition of opioids to propofol, though beneficial for analgesia, introduces risks such as hypoxemia and hypotension. These challenges necessitate exploring alternative combinations that balance sedation depth with fewer side effects.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the efficacy and safety of deep sedoanalgesia achieved with dexmedetomidine-propofol versus remifentanil-propofol combinations in daily anesthesia practices.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective randomized clinical study.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>This study was carried out at Dursun Odabaş Medical Center.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Eighty ASA I-II patients, aged 18-65, scheduled for elective hysteroscopic interventions under sedoanalgesia were included in the study.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary aim of our study was to identify an anesthetic agent combination capable of delivering effective and safe deep sedation, with sedation depth assessed via the Ramsey Sedation Score (RSS) and respiratory safety evaluated through desaturation rates. Secondary endpoints included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, oxygen saturation (SpO2), patient, surgeon, and anesthesiologist satisfaction scores, hemodynamic parameters, the time to achieve an RSS > 4, the time to reach a Modified Aldrete Score (MAS) > 9, and the requirement for mask ventilation and jaw thrust maneuvers.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Patients were randomized into two groups (n = 40 each): Group DP (Dexmedetomidine-Propofol): A bolus of 1 mg/kg IV propofol and 1 mcg/kg IV dexmedetomidine over 10 min, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.2-1.4 mcg/kg/hour. Group RP (Remifentanil-Propofol): A bolus of 1 mg/kg IV propofol and 0.25 mcg/kg IV remifentanil, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.025-0.1 mcg/kg/minute.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients in the DP group exhibited significantly lower VAS scores and desaturation rates (p = 0.003) compared to the RP group. Satisfaction scores (patient, surgeon, anesthesiologist) and integrated pulmonary index (IPI) values were significantly higher in the DP group (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The dexmedetomidine-propofol combination is an effective and safe anesthetic regimen for deep sedation in outpatient hysteroscopic procedures, offering adequate sedation and superior preservation of respiratory function. Additionally, the dexmedetomidine-propofol combination ensures more stable hemodynamics, with a lower incidence of hypoxia, and results in higher satisfaction rates among patients, surgeons, and anesthesiologists.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinical Trials ID is NCT05674201 Date 2022.12.07.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9190,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11776121/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-025-02918-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-025-02918-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:患者安全在日常麻醉实践中是重要的,提供深度麻醉是困难的。目前关于最佳麻醉剂的争论强调需要更安全的替代品。对于门诊宫腔镜手术,特别是在手术室外进行的手术,需要更安全、更有效的麻醉方案,这证明了这项研究的合理性。异丙酚虽然被广泛使用,但也有明显的局限性,包括呼吸抑制、血流动力学不稳定以及当需要更高剂量的镇静时恢复延迟。在异丙酚中添加阿片类药物,虽然有利于镇痛,但会带来低氧血症和低血压等风险。这些挑战需要探索替代组合,以平衡镇静深度和较少的副作用。目的:评价右美托咪定-异丙酚与瑞芬太尼-异丙酚复合在日常麻醉中实现深度镇痛的有效性和安全性。设计:前瞻性随机临床研究。环境:本研究在Dursun odabaku医疗中心进行。患者:80例ASA I-II型患者,年龄18-65岁,计划在选择性宫腔镜下进行sedo镇痛干预。主要结局指标:本研究的主要目的是确定一种能够提供有效和安全深度镇静的麻醉剂组合,通过Ramsey镇静评分(RSS)评估镇静深度,通过去饱和率评估呼吸安全性。次要终点包括视觉模拟评分(VAS)评分、血氧饱和度(SpO2)、患者、外科医生和麻醉师满意度评分、血流动力学参数、达到RSS bbbb4的时间、达到改良Aldrete评分(MAS) bbbb9的时间、面罩通气和下颌推力操作的要求。干预措施:将患者随机分为两组(每组40人):DP组(右美托咪定-异丙酚):静脉注射异丙酚1 mg/kg,静脉注射右美托咪定1 mcg/kg,持续输注10 min,随后持续输注0.2-1.4 mcg/kg/h。RP组(瑞芬太尼-异丙酚):静脉异丙酚1 mg/kg,静脉瑞芬太尼0.25 mcg/kg,连续输注0.025-0.1 mcg/kg/min。结果:DP组患者的VAS评分和去饱和率明显低于RP组(p = 0.003)。DP组患者满意度评分(患者、外科医生、麻醉师)和综合肺指数(IPI)值均显著高于DP组(p)。结论:右美托咪啶-异丙酚联合麻醉方案在门诊宫腔镜手术中用于深度镇静是一种有效、安全的麻醉方案,具有充分的镇静作用和良好的呼吸功能保存。此外,右美托咪啶-异丙酚联合使用可确保更稳定的血流动力学,降低缺氧发生率,并提高患者、外科医生和麻醉师的满意度。试验注册:临床试验ID: NCT05674201日期:2022.12.07。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Sedoanalgesia with dexmedetomidine in daily anesthesia practices: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Background: Patient safety is important in daily anesthesia practices, and providing deep anesthesia is difficult. Current debates on the optimal anesthetic agents highlight the need for safer alternatives. This study was justified by the need for safer and more effective anesthetic protocols for outpatient hysteroscopic procedures, particularly those conducted outside the operating room. Propofol, while widely used, has significant limitations, including respiratory depression, hemodynamic instability, and delayed recovery when higher doses are required for adequate sedation. The addition of opioids to propofol, though beneficial for analgesia, introduces risks such as hypoxemia and hypotension. These challenges necessitate exploring alternative combinations that balance sedation depth with fewer side effects.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of deep sedoanalgesia achieved with dexmedetomidine-propofol versus remifentanil-propofol combinations in daily anesthesia practices.

Design: Prospective randomized clinical study.

Settings: This study was carried out at Dursun Odabaş Medical Center.

Patients: Eighty ASA I-II patients, aged 18-65, scheduled for elective hysteroscopic interventions under sedoanalgesia were included in the study.

Main outcome measures: The primary aim of our study was to identify an anesthetic agent combination capable of delivering effective and safe deep sedation, with sedation depth assessed via the Ramsey Sedation Score (RSS) and respiratory safety evaluated through desaturation rates. Secondary endpoints included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, oxygen saturation (SpO2), patient, surgeon, and anesthesiologist satisfaction scores, hemodynamic parameters, the time to achieve an RSS > 4, the time to reach a Modified Aldrete Score (MAS) > 9, and the requirement for mask ventilation and jaw thrust maneuvers.

Interventions: Patients were randomized into two groups (n = 40 each): Group DP (Dexmedetomidine-Propofol): A bolus of 1 mg/kg IV propofol and 1 mcg/kg IV dexmedetomidine over 10 min, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.2-1.4 mcg/kg/hour. Group RP (Remifentanil-Propofol): A bolus of 1 mg/kg IV propofol and 0.25 mcg/kg IV remifentanil, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.025-0.1 mcg/kg/minute.

Results: Patients in the DP group exhibited significantly lower VAS scores and desaturation rates (p = 0.003) compared to the RP group. Satisfaction scores (patient, surgeon, anesthesiologist) and integrated pulmonary index (IPI) values were significantly higher in the DP group (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: The dexmedetomidine-propofol combination is an effective and safe anesthetic regimen for deep sedation in outpatient hysteroscopic procedures, offering adequate sedation and superior preservation of respiratory function. Additionally, the dexmedetomidine-propofol combination ensures more stable hemodynamics, with a lower incidence of hypoxia, and results in higher satisfaction rates among patients, surgeons, and anesthesiologists.

Trial registration: Clinical Trials ID is NCT05674201 Date 2022.12.07.

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
BMC Anesthesiology
BMC Anesthesiology ANESTHESIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
349
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Anesthesiology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of anesthesiology, critical care, perioperative care and pain management, including clinical and experimental research into anesthetic mechanisms, administration and efficacy, technology and monitoring, and associated economic issues.
期刊最新文献
Continuous serratus-intercostal plane block versus intercostal cryoanalgesia for postoperative pain after minimally invasive cardiac surgery: a prospective comparative observational study. Jet ventilation and hemodynamic stability during pulmonary vein isolation: ventilatory and hemodynamic outcomes from a randomized controlled trial (Secondary analysis under EEG-Guided Total Intravenous Anesthesia). Conversational artificial intelligence in the operating room: an exploratory cross-sectional single-center survey among anesthesiology residents. Prognostic value of the early D-dimer/fibrinogen ratio in critically ill patients requiring vascular surgery: a retrospective study. Interpretable machine learning to predict postoperative adverse outcomes in cardiac surgery.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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