Dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl as coadjuvants of balanced anaesthesia technique in renal transplant recipients.

Sunder Negi, Indu Sen, Virender Arya, Ashish Sharma
{"title":"Dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl as coadjuvants of balanced anaesthesia technique in renal transplant recipients.","authors":"Sunder Negi,&nbsp;Indu Sen,&nbsp;Virender Arya,&nbsp;Ashish Sharma","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ideal anesthetic technique for renal allograft recipients should provide hemodynamic stability, optimum graft reperfusion and adequate analgesia. Balanced anesthesia is preferred because renal nociception is conducted multi-segmentally and chronically ill ESRD patients have labile psychological profile. Present study compared the efficacy ofdexmedetomidine with fentanyl administered via intravenous and epidural route before induction of general anesthesia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospective, double blind randomized study, recruited sixty hemo-dynamically stable ESRD adults, 18-55 years, scheduled for elective live related renal transplantation. Patients randomly received intravenous dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg followed by epidural dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg alongwith 5 ml; 0.25% ropivacaine or intravenous fentanyl 1 μg/kg followed by epiduralfentanyl 1 μg/kg alongwith 5 ml; 0.25% ropivacaine. All patients received standardized general anaesthesia and continuous epidural ropivacaine 0.25%; 4-8 ml/hr. Preoperative sedation, peri-operative haemodynamics, end tidal anaesthetic agent requirement, peri-operative fluid requirement, need for vasopressors, blood loss and early graft function was assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>80% patients receiving intravenous dexmedetomidine did not require rescue midazolam for achieving satisfactory sedation before induction of general anaesthesia. Dexmedetomidine significantly reduced propofol and end tidal inhalational agents requirement and need for rescue analgesics. Early renal graft function (onset time of diuresis after declamping, 24 hours urine output and serum creatinine levels) was comparable. There were no adverse sequelae.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Dexmedetomidine-based anaesthetic regimen versus fentanyl-based anaesthesia provided appropriate anxiolysis and analgesia for conducting invasive procedures and subsequent epidural administration of these agents reduced anaesthetic requirement and prolonged postoperative analgesia without compromising hemodynamics and respiratory parameters. Further dose finding studies can be conducted in kidney transplant recipients.</p>","PeriodicalId":35975,"journal":{"name":"Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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: Ideal anesthetic technique for renal allograft recipients should provide hemodynamic stability, optimum graft reperfusion and adequate analgesia. Balanced anesthesia is preferred because renal nociception is conducted multi-segmentally and chronically ill ESRD patients have labile psychological profile. Present study compared the efficacy ofdexmedetomidine with fentanyl administered via intravenous and epidural route before induction of general anesthesia.

Methods: Prospective, double blind randomized study, recruited sixty hemo-dynamically stable ESRD adults, 18-55 years, scheduled for elective live related renal transplantation. Patients randomly received intravenous dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg followed by epidural dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg alongwith 5 ml; 0.25% ropivacaine or intravenous fentanyl 1 μg/kg followed by epiduralfentanyl 1 μg/kg alongwith 5 ml; 0.25% ropivacaine. All patients received standardized general anaesthesia and continuous epidural ropivacaine 0.25%; 4-8 ml/hr. Preoperative sedation, peri-operative haemodynamics, end tidal anaesthetic agent requirement, peri-operative fluid requirement, need for vasopressors, blood loss and early graft function was assessed.

Results: 80% patients receiving intravenous dexmedetomidine did not require rescue midazolam for achieving satisfactory sedation before induction of general anaesthesia. Dexmedetomidine significantly reduced propofol and end tidal inhalational agents requirement and need for rescue analgesics. Early renal graft function (onset time of diuresis after declamping, 24 hours urine output and serum creatinine levels) was comparable. There were no adverse sequelae.

Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine-based anaesthetic regimen versus fentanyl-based anaesthesia provided appropriate anxiolysis and analgesia for conducting invasive procedures and subsequent epidural administration of these agents reduced anaesthetic requirement and prolonged postoperative analgesia without compromising hemodynamics and respiratory parameters. Further dose finding studies can be conducted in kidney transplant recipients.

右美托咪定与芬太尼在肾移植受者平衡麻醉技术中的辅助作用。
背景:对于肾移植受者来说,理想的麻醉技术应该提供稳定的血流动力学,最佳的移植物再灌注和足够的镇痛。平衡麻醉是首选,因为肾脏伤害是多节段进行的,慢性ESRD患者的心理状况不稳定。本研究比较了右美托咪定与芬太尼在全麻诱导前经静脉和硬膜外给药的疗效。方法:前瞻性、双盲随机研究,招募60名血液动力学稳定的ESRD成人,年龄18-55岁,计划择期活体肾移植。患者随机静脉注射右美托咪定0.5 μg/kg,硬膜外注射右美托咪定0.5 μg/kg,同时注射5 ml;0.25%罗哌卡因或静脉注射芬太尼1 μg/kg,随后硬膜外芬太尼1 μg/kg加5 ml;ropivacaine 0.25%。所有患者均接受标准化全身麻醉和持续硬膜外罗哌卡因0.25%;4 - 8毫升/小时。评估术前镇静、围手术期血流动力学、潮末麻醉剂用量、围手术期液体用量、血管加压剂用量、出血量和早期移植物功能。结果:80%接受右美托咪定静脉注射的患者在全麻诱导前不需要抢救咪达唑仑即可达到满意的镇静效果。右美托咪定显著减少异丙酚和末潮汐吸入剂的需求和对抢救镇痛药的需求。早期移植肾功能(去钳后利尿开始时间、24小时尿量和血清肌酐水平)具有可比性。无不良后遗症。结论:以右美托咪定为基础的麻醉方案与芬太尼为基础的麻醉方案在进行有创手术时提供了适当的焦虑和镇痛,随后硬膜外给药这些药物减少了麻醉需求,延长了术后镇痛时间,而不影响血流动力学和呼吸参数。进一步的剂量研究可以在肾移植受者中进行。
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
Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology
Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The journal is published three times a year (February, June, and October) and has an Editorial Executive Committee from the department and consultant editors from various Arab countries. A volume consists of six issues. Presently, it is in its 42nd year of publication and is currently in its 19th volume. It has a worldwide circulation and effective March 2008, the MEJA has become an electronic journal. The main objective of the journal is to act as a forum for publication, education, and exchange of opinions, and to promote research and publications of the Middle Eastern heritage of medicine and anesthesia.
×
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