A comparative study of two different doses of dexmedetomedine as an adjuvant to lignocaine in infiltration block for tympanoplasty: a triple-blinded, prospective, randomized controlled trial.

Anesthesia and pain medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-31 DOI:10.17085/apm.24105
Richa Singh, Annu Choudhary, Swati Singh, Harsh Kumar
{"title":"A comparative study of two different doses of dexmedetomedine as an adjuvant to lignocaine in infiltration block for tympanoplasty: a triple-blinded, prospective, randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Richa Singh, Annu Choudhary, Swati Singh, Harsh Kumar","doi":"10.17085/apm.24105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The ideal anesthetic drug choice for local infiltration anesthesia under monitored anesthesia care must provide analgesia and patients' comfort along with a bloodless surgical field for patients. We hypothesized that dexemedetomidine can provide better visibility of the surgical field at a higher dose of 1 µg/kg than 0.5 µg/kg, along with providing sedation and analgesia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After institutional ethics committee clearance and written informed consent, this prospective, randomized, triple blind study was conducted on ninety patients, between 18- 65 years who were scheduled for tympanoplasty. The patients were randomly assigned to either the dexmedetomidine (DEX) 0.5 group or the DEX 1.0 group, and received 10 ml solution containing 2% lignocaine with 0.5 µg/kg dexmedetomidine, or the 1 µg/kg dexmedetomidine. The operative surgeon performed local infiltration using standardized 5-point infiltration technique around the auricle. The primary objective was to compare the intraoperative bleeding at the surgical site. The comparison of normally distributed variables was conducted using the Student's t-test, whereas non-normally distributed variables was compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. The analysis of qualitative data was conducted using the chisquare/Fisher's exact test. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall bleeding score was significantly higher in the DEX 0.5 group (3.21 ± 0.727) than the DEX 1.0 group (1.43 ± 0.661) (P value < 0.001). The time to first analgesic requirement and surgeon satisfaction score were also significantly higher in the DEX 1.0 group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Combining dexmedetomidine at a dose of 1 µg/kg with 2% lignocaine for infiltration provided improved analgesia and improved the surgical field during tympanoplasty performed under monitored anesthesia care.</p>","PeriodicalId":101360,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia and pain medicine","volume":"19 4","pages":"310-319"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11558052/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia and pain medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17085/apm.24105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The ideal anesthetic drug choice for local infiltration anesthesia under monitored anesthesia care must provide analgesia and patients' comfort along with a bloodless surgical field for patients. We hypothesized that dexemedetomidine can provide better visibility of the surgical field at a higher dose of 1 µg/kg than 0.5 µg/kg, along with providing sedation and analgesia.

Methods: After institutional ethics committee clearance and written informed consent, this prospective, randomized, triple blind study was conducted on ninety patients, between 18- 65 years who were scheduled for tympanoplasty. The patients were randomly assigned to either the dexmedetomidine (DEX) 0.5 group or the DEX 1.0 group, and received 10 ml solution containing 2% lignocaine with 0.5 µg/kg dexmedetomidine, or the 1 µg/kg dexmedetomidine. The operative surgeon performed local infiltration using standardized 5-point infiltration technique around the auricle. The primary objective was to compare the intraoperative bleeding at the surgical site. The comparison of normally distributed variables was conducted using the Student's t-test, whereas non-normally distributed variables was compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. The analysis of qualitative data was conducted using the chisquare/Fisher's exact test. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: The overall bleeding score was significantly higher in the DEX 0.5 group (3.21 ± 0.727) than the DEX 1.0 group (1.43 ± 0.661) (P value < 0.001). The time to first analgesic requirement and surgeon satisfaction score were also significantly higher in the DEX 1.0 group.

Conclusions: Combining dexmedetomidine at a dose of 1 µg/kg with 2% lignocaine for infiltration provided improved analgesia and improved the surgical field during tympanoplasty performed under monitored anesthesia care.

将两种不同剂量的右美托咪定作为木质素浸润阻滞剂用于鼓室成形术的比较研究:一项三盲、前瞻性、随机对照试验。
背景:在监测麻醉护理下进行局部浸润麻醉时,理想的麻醉药物选择必须在为患者提供无血手术野的同时,为患者提供镇痛和舒适感。我们推测,与 0.5 µg/kg 相比,1 µg/kg 剂量的右美托咪定能提供更好的手术视野,同时还能提供镇静和镇痛:在获得机构伦理委员会批准和书面知情同意后,我们对 90 名年龄在 18-65 岁之间、计划接受鼓室成形术的患者进行了这项前瞻性、随机、三盲研究。患者被随机分配到右美托咪定(DEX)0.5组或右美托咪定1.0组,接受10毫升含2%木质素卡因和0.5微克/千克右美托咪定的溶液或1微克/千克右美托咪定的溶液。手术医生采用标准化的耳廓周围五点浸润技术进行局部浸润。主要目的是比较手术部位的术中出血量。正态分布变量的比较采用学生 t 检验,非正态分布变量的比较采用 Mann-Whitney U 检验。定性数据的分析采用秩方/费舍尔精确检验。P值小于0.05为有统计学意义:结果:DEX 0.5 组的总体出血评分(3.21 ± 0.727)明显高于 DEX 1.0 组(1.43 ± 0.661)(P 值小于 0.001)。DEX 1.0 组的首次镇痛需求时间和外科医生满意度评分也明显更高:结论:在监测麻醉护理下进行鼓室成形术时,将 1 µg/kg 剂量的右美托咪定与 2% 木质卡因联合用于浸润,可改善镇痛效果并改善手术视野。
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
CiteScore
2.30
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