Comparative efficacy of different doses of dexmedetomidine in sedation during awake fibreoptic nasotracheal intubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.9 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-06-12 DOI:10.4103/ija.ija_120_25
Mohd Ovais Alam, Nishaant Ramasamy, Gowtham Kannan, Mogan Kaviprawin, Bijaya Kumar Padhi, Aravind P Gandhi
{"title":"Comparative efficacy of different doses of dexmedetomidine in sedation during awake fibreoptic nasotracheal intubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Mohd Ovais Alam, Nishaant Ramasamy, Gowtham Kannan, Mogan Kaviprawin, Bijaya Kumar Padhi, Aravind P Gandhi","doi":"10.4103/ija.ija_120_25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Awake fibreoptic nasotracheal intubation (AFONI) is critical in patients with difficult airways, requiring effective sedation that preserves spontaneous ventilation and airway reflexes. This systematic review evaluated the comparative efficacy of various dexmedetomidine doses in sedation for AFONI, with a meta-analysis focusing on 0.5, 1, and 1.5 µg/kg doses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane, initially up to 5 May 2024, with a top-up search on 15 April 2025. Five studies were systematically reviewed, covering dexmedetomidine doses of 0.5, 0.7, 1, 1.5, and 2 µg/kg. A meta-analysis was conducted on two studies with doses of 1 and 1.5 µg/kg, and two studies with doses of 0.5 and 1.5 µg/kg. Primary outcomes included patient comfort, intubation scores, and sedation levels; secondary outcomes included vocal cord function, cough, and limb movements. Continuous and dichotomous outcome variables were summarised as mean difference and risk ratio, with a 95% confidence interval, using RStudio 2024.12.0 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42024541481).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Meta-analysis showed that 1.5 µg/kg did not significantly improve patient comfort or intubation conditions compared to 1 and 0.5 µg/kg. No significant differences were observed in intubation comfort scores, sedation levels, or patient satisfaction across the various doses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dexmedetomidine at 0.5 and 1 µg/kg offers effective sedation and patient comfort comparable to 1.5 µg/kg during AFONI. Given the very low to moderate certainty of evidence, further large-scale studies are warranted to establish optimal dosing for enhanced patient experience and reduced side effects across various clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":13339,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"69 7","pages":"650-663"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12244460/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_120_25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: Awake fibreoptic nasotracheal intubation (AFONI) is critical in patients with difficult airways, requiring effective sedation that preserves spontaneous ventilation and airway reflexes. This systematic review evaluated the comparative efficacy of various dexmedetomidine doses in sedation for AFONI, with a meta-analysis focusing on 0.5, 1, and 1.5 µg/kg doses.

Methods: Databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane, initially up to 5 May 2024, with a top-up search on 15 April 2025. Five studies were systematically reviewed, covering dexmedetomidine doses of 0.5, 0.7, 1, 1.5, and 2 µg/kg. A meta-analysis was conducted on two studies with doses of 1 and 1.5 µg/kg, and two studies with doses of 0.5 and 1.5 µg/kg. Primary outcomes included patient comfort, intubation scores, and sedation levels; secondary outcomes included vocal cord function, cough, and limb movements. Continuous and dichotomous outcome variables were summarised as mean difference and risk ratio, with a 95% confidence interval, using RStudio 2024.12.0 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42024541481).

Results: Meta-analysis showed that 1.5 µg/kg did not significantly improve patient comfort or intubation conditions compared to 1 and 0.5 µg/kg. No significant differences were observed in intubation comfort scores, sedation levels, or patient satisfaction across the various doses.

Conclusions: Dexmedetomidine at 0.5 and 1 µg/kg offers effective sedation and patient comfort comparable to 1.5 µg/kg during AFONI. Given the very low to moderate certainty of evidence, further large-scale studies are warranted to establish optimal dosing for enhanced patient experience and reduced side effects across various clinical settings.

不同剂量右美托咪定在清醒纤维鼻气管插管镇静中的比较疗效:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景和目的:清醒纤维鼻气管插管(AFONI)对于气道困难的患者至关重要,需要有效的镇静来保持自发通气和气道反射。本系统综述评估了不同剂量右美托咪定用于AFONI镇静的比较疗效,并对0.5、1和1.5µg/kg剂量进行了荟萃分析。方法:检索的数据库包括PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science和Cochrane,初始检索截止到2024年5月5日,并于2025年4月15日进行了补充检索。系统回顾了5项研究,涉及右美托咪定剂量为0.5、0.7、1、1.5和2µg/kg。对剂量为1和1.5µg/kg的两项研究以及剂量为0.5和1.5µg/kg的两项研究进行了荟萃分析。主要结局包括患者舒适度、插管评分和镇静水平;次要结局包括声带功能、咳嗽和肢体运动。使用RStudio 2024.12.0 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42024541481)将连续和二分类结局变量总结为平均差值和风险比,置信区间为95%。结果:荟萃分析显示,与1和0.5µg/kg相比,1.5µg/kg并没有显著改善患者的舒适度或插管条件。不同剂量的插管舒适度评分、镇静水平或患者满意度均无显著差异。结论:在AFONI期间,右美托咪定在0.5和1µg/kg时具有有效的镇静作用,患者舒适度与1.5µg/kg相当。鉴于证据的确定性非常低到中等,有必要进一步进行大规模研究,以确定在各种临床环境中提高患者体验和减少副作用的最佳剂量。
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
4.20
自引率
44.80%
发文量
210
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信