A prospective randomized comparative study on the effectiveness of intrathecal dexmedetomidine and fentanyl as adjuvants to 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia

Sureshkumar Chodavarapu, A. K. M. Sastri
{"title":"A prospective randomized comparative study on the effectiveness of intrathecal dexmedetomidine and fentanyl as adjuvants to 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia","authors":"Sureshkumar Chodavarapu, A. K. M. Sastri","doi":"10.26611/10151122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Improvements in perioperative pain management for lower abdominal operations have been revealed to decrease morbidity, stimulate untimely ambulation, and progress patients’ long-term outcomes. Dexmedetomidine, a selective alpha-2 agonist, has newly been used intrathecally as adjuvant to spinal anesthesia to extend its effectiveness. We compared different adjuvants they are dexmedetomidine and fentanyl added to hyperbaric bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia. The main endpoints were the time of onset and duration of sensory and motor block, Two segment sensory regression time, and duration of analgesia and occurrence of side effects Method: A total of 60 patients, aged 20-45 years old of physical status of ASA grade I,II, assigned to have elective lower limb surgeries under spinal anesthesia were divided into two equally sized groups (Group 1 and Group 2) in a randomized, fashion. The Group 1 was intrathecally administered 15mg hyperbaric bupivacaine with 25μg fentanyl in 0.5ml of normal saline and the group 2 group 15mg bupivacaine with 10μg dexmedetomidine in 0.5ml of normal saline. For each patient, sensory and motor block onset times, and the duration of two segment sensory regression time, sensory, motor blockade and duration of effective postoperative analgesia, were recorded. Results and Conclusion: The time of onset and duration of sensory and motor blockade and the duration of two segment sensory regression time of effective postoperative analgesia was statistically significant in dexmedetomidine (group 2) compared to fentanyl (group 1). The make use of 10μg dexmedetomidine with hyperbaric bupivacaine compared to intrathecal Fentanyl to adjuvant hyperbaric bupivacaine seems to be more efficiently hastens the onset and prolongs the time of sensory and motor blockade. Intraoperatively, there were fewer occurrences of side effects with intrathecal dexmedetomidine when compared to intrathecal fentanyl and reduces the requirement of rescue analgesic in the postoperative period in patients undergoing elective lower limb surgeries.","PeriodicalId":118187,"journal":{"name":"MedPulse International Journal of Anesthesology","volume":"64 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MedPulse International Journal of Anesthesology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26611/10151122","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: Improvements in perioperative pain management for lower abdominal operations have been revealed to decrease morbidity, stimulate untimely ambulation, and progress patients’ long-term outcomes. Dexmedetomidine, a selective alpha-2 agonist, has newly been used intrathecally as adjuvant to spinal anesthesia to extend its effectiveness. We compared different adjuvants they are dexmedetomidine and fentanyl added to hyperbaric bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia. The main endpoints were the time of onset and duration of sensory and motor block, Two segment sensory regression time, and duration of analgesia and occurrence of side effects Method: A total of 60 patients, aged 20-45 years old of physical status of ASA grade I,II, assigned to have elective lower limb surgeries under spinal anesthesia were divided into two equally sized groups (Group 1 and Group 2) in a randomized, fashion. The Group 1 was intrathecally administered 15mg hyperbaric bupivacaine with 25μg fentanyl in 0.5ml of normal saline and the group 2 group 15mg bupivacaine with 10μg dexmedetomidine in 0.5ml of normal saline. For each patient, sensory and motor block onset times, and the duration of two segment sensory regression time, sensory, motor blockade and duration of effective postoperative analgesia, were recorded. Results and Conclusion: The time of onset and duration of sensory and motor blockade and the duration of two segment sensory regression time of effective postoperative analgesia was statistically significant in dexmedetomidine (group 2) compared to fentanyl (group 1). The make use of 10μg dexmedetomidine with hyperbaric bupivacaine compared to intrathecal Fentanyl to adjuvant hyperbaric bupivacaine seems to be more efficiently hastens the onset and prolongs the time of sensory and motor blockade. Intraoperatively, there were fewer occurrences of side effects with intrathecal dexmedetomidine when compared to intrathecal fentanyl and reduces the requirement of rescue analgesic in the postoperative period in patients undergoing elective lower limb surgeries.
一项前瞻性随机比较研究:鞘内右美托咪定和芬太尼作为0.5%高压布比卡因的辅助剂在脊髓麻醉中的有效性
背景:下腹手术围手术期疼痛管理的改善已被证明可以降低发病率,刺激患者过早活动,并改善患者的长期预后。右美托咪定是一种选择性α -2激动剂,最近被用于鞘内辅助脊髓麻醉以延长其有效性。我们比较了不同的佐剂,右美托咪定和芬太尼加入高压压布比卡因用于脊髓麻醉。主要终点为感觉和运动阻滞的发生时间和持续时间、两段感觉消退时间、镇痛持续时间和副作用发生时间。方法:60例年龄20 ~ 45岁,身体状态为ASA I级、II级,择期行脊髓麻醉下下肢手术的患者,随机分为大小相等的2组(1组和2组)。1组患者鞘内给予高压布比卡因+ 25μg芬太尼+ 0.5ml生理盐水15mg; 2组患者鞘内给予布比卡因+ 10μg右美托咪定+ 0.5ml生理盐水15mg。记录每位患者的感觉和运动阻滞发作次数、两段感觉消退时间、感觉、运动阻滞时间和术后有效镇痛时间。结果与结论:右美托咪定(2组)与芬太尼(1组)相比,术后有效镇痛的感觉和运动阻断的起效时间、持续时间和两段感觉消退时间均有统计学意义。与鞘内芬太尼辅助高压布比卡因相比,10μg右美托咪定联合高压布比卡因似乎更有效地加速起效,延长感觉和运动阻断的时间。术中,与鞘内芬太尼相比,鞘内右美托咪定的副作用发生率更低,并且减少了选择性下肢手术患者术后对抢救镇痛药的需求。
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