Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery.

Anesthesia, Essays and Researches Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-09 DOI:10.4103/aer.aer_121_22
Vishwadeep Singh, Akhilesh Pahade, Ashita Mowar
{"title":"Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery.","authors":"Vishwadeep Singh,&nbsp;Akhilesh Pahade,&nbsp;Ashita Mowar","doi":"10.4103/aer.aer_121_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Perioperative pain management is a major challenge for anaesthesiologists. IV lidocaine and dexmedetomidine have been utilised for peri-operative pain management.</p><p><strong>Aims and objectives: </strong>To analyse the effects of intraoperative intravenous lignocaine/dexmedetomidine on pain relief, opioid consumption, peri-operative hemodynamic and side-effect profiles/unique interactions in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Prospective, interventional, single-centric, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, Helsinki protocol-compliant clinical study was conducted on 90 ASA I/II class patients aged 18-60 yrs. This Patients were block-randomised to Group-L (2% Lignocaine), Group-D (dexmedetomidine) and Group C (Control/Placebo/0.9% normal saline). Hemodynamic were noted at pre-defined time frames intra-/post-operatively. Post-operative VAS score and Richmond Agitation Sedation Score monitoring was done.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Demographic parameters of were comparable. Mean intra-operative fentanyl consumption amongst the three groups were 20.5 ± 20.05 mcg, 26.5 ± 17.57 mcg and 46.83 + 21.31 mcg (Group-L, Group-D, Group-C; <i>P</i> value Group-L vs Group-D:0.22, Group L/D vs Group C: <0.0001). Group-D exhibited the lower heart rates and MAP (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Extubation- First rescue analgesic phase was comparable for the Group-C and Group-L (59.17 ± 46.224 min vs 61.64 ± 53.819 min) and significantly greater in Group-D (136.07 + 55.350 min; <i>P</i> < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both Dexmedetomidine and lignocaine can be useful intra-operative pain relief adjuncts. Dexmedetomidine delayed First rescue analgesic and total analgesic consumption more than lignocaine. Dexmedetomidine patients exhibited bradycardia intraoperatively more than the other groups. we recommend, Dexmedetomidine in the intra-operative phase and lignocaine in the post-operative phase can be an alternative in patients who are poor candidates for post-operative opioids/sedation/contraindicated regional anaesthesia regimes.</p>","PeriodicalId":7798,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia, Essays and Researches","volume":"16 3","pages":"353-359"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9813992/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia, Essays and Researches","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/aer.aer_121_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Perioperative pain management is a major challenge for anaesthesiologists. IV lidocaine and dexmedetomidine have been utilised for peri-operative pain management.

Aims and objectives: To analyse the effects of intraoperative intravenous lignocaine/dexmedetomidine on pain relief, opioid consumption, peri-operative hemodynamic and side-effect profiles/unique interactions in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries.

Materials and methods: Prospective, interventional, single-centric, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, Helsinki protocol-compliant clinical study was conducted on 90 ASA I/II class patients aged 18-60 yrs. This Patients were block-randomised to Group-L (2% Lignocaine), Group-D (dexmedetomidine) and Group C (Control/Placebo/0.9% normal saline). Hemodynamic were noted at pre-defined time frames intra-/post-operatively. Post-operative VAS score and Richmond Agitation Sedation Score monitoring was done.

Results: Demographic parameters of were comparable. Mean intra-operative fentanyl consumption amongst the three groups were 20.5 ± 20.05 mcg, 26.5 ± 17.57 mcg and 46.83 + 21.31 mcg (Group-L, Group-D, Group-C; P value Group-L vs Group-D:0.22, Group L/D vs Group C: <0.0001). Group-D exhibited the lower heart rates and MAP (P < 0.05). Extubation- First rescue analgesic phase was comparable for the Group-C and Group-L (59.17 ± 46.224 min vs 61.64 ± 53.819 min) and significantly greater in Group-D (136.07 + 55.350 min; P < 0.0001).

Conclusion: Both Dexmedetomidine and lignocaine can be useful intra-operative pain relief adjuncts. Dexmedetomidine delayed First rescue analgesic and total analgesic consumption more than lignocaine. Dexmedetomidine patients exhibited bradycardia intraoperatively more than the other groups. we recommend, Dexmedetomidine in the intra-operative phase and lignocaine in the post-operative phase can be an alternative in patients who are poor candidates for post-operative opioids/sedation/contraindicated regional anaesthesia regimes.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

静脉注射右美托咪定和利多卡因对腹腔镜手术患者围术期镇痛药物消耗的疗效比较。
背景:围手术期疼痛管理是麻醉师面临的主要挑战。静脉注射利多卡因和右美托咪定已用于围手术期疼痛管理。目的和目的:分析术中静脉注射利多卡因/右美托咪定对腹腔镜手术患者的疼痛缓解、阿片类药物消耗、围手术期血液动力学和副作用/独特相互作用的影响。材料和方法:对90名年龄在18-60岁的ASA I/II级患者进行前瞻性、介入性、单中心、双盲、随机、主动对照、符合赫尔辛基方案的临床研究。这些患者被分为L组(2%利多卡因)、D组(右美托咪定)和C组(对照/安慰剂/0.9%生理盐水)。术中/术后在预先定义的时间范围内记录血液动力学。术后VAS评分和Richmond激动镇静评分监测。结果:的人口学参数具有可比性。三组术中芬太尼平均消耗量为20.5±20.05 mcg,26.5±17.57 mcg和46.83±21.31 mcg(L组、D组、C组;P值L组与D组:0.22,L/D组与C组:P<0.05)。C组和L组的拔管-第一次抢救镇痛阶段具有可比性(59.17±46.224 min与61.64±53.819 min),D组显著更高(136.07±55.350 min;P<0.0001)。结论:地塞米松和利多卡因都是有用的术中镇痛辅助药物。右美托咪定比利多卡因更延迟急救镇痛和总镇痛消耗。右美托咪定患者在术中表现出的心动过缓多于其他组。我们建议,术中阶段的右美托咪定和术后阶段的利多卡因可以作为术后阿片类药物/镇静/禁忌症区域麻醉方案的替代方案。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信