静脉注射右美托咪定与球周麻醉在斜视手术中的辅助作用:一项随机、双盲临床试验。

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Pain physician Pub Date : 2024-11-01
Huda F Ghazaly, Ibrahim E Hassan, Ahmed F Gabr, Taha T Dardeer, Mohamed A Alazhary
{"title":"静脉注射右美托咪定与球周麻醉在斜视手术中的辅助作用:一项随机、双盲临床试验。","authors":"Huda F Ghazaly, Ibrahim E Hassan, Ahmed F Gabr, Taha T Dardeer, Mohamed A Alazhary","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dexmedetomidine has not been adequately studied as an adjuvant to peribulbar anesthesia in strabismus surgery.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We investigated how different routes of dexmedetomidine administration affect the peribulbar block characteristics in adults undergoing strabismus surgery.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A randomized, double-blind clinical trial. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee (approval number: 520/3/2021) and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05215158).</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The trial included 46 patients aged 20-60 years with an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System of  I or II who were scheduled for unilateral strabismus surgery at a university hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients were randomly assigned to an intravenous dexmedetomidine group (n = 15) who received 50 µg dexmedetomidine in 50 mL normal saline intravenously over 10 minutes, followed by a peribulbar block using a 10 mL mixture of 4 mL lidocaine 2%, 4 mL bupivacaine 0.5%, and 2 mL normal saline containing 150 international units (IU) hyaluronidase. The peribulbar dexmedetomidine group (n = 31) received 50 mL normal saline intravenously over 10 minutes, followed by a peribulbar block using a 10 mL mixture of 4 mL lidocaine 2%, 4 mL bupivacaine 0.5%, 1 mL normal saline with 150 IU hyaluronidase, and 1 mL normal saline containing 50 µg dexmedetomidine. Sensory and motor block onset and duration, analgesia duration, and patient and surgeon satisfaction were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Peribulbar dexmedetomidine prolonged the median duration of postoperative analgesia by 3.2 hours. Patients who received peribulbar dexmedetomidine benefitted from a longer time to request postoperative analgesia than those who got intravenous dexmedetomidine (7.17 ± 2.0 hours vs 5.79 ± 2.1 hours; P = 0.048). Motor block duration was longer in the peribulbar group compared to the intravenous group (198.34 ± 17.3 minutes vs 148.93 ± 13.7 minutes; P = 0.001). Patient and surgeon satisfaction was higher in the peribulbar dexmedetomidine group compared to the intravenous dexmedetomidine group (P = 0.048, P = 0.016, respectively). Strabismus surgery duration was shorter in the intravenous dexmedetomidine group than in the peribulbar group (38.01 ± 8.3 minutes vs 55.01 ± 11.9 minutes; P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Our study took place at a single-center with a small sample size limited to adult patients undergoing strabismus surgery. The study was not powered to identify differences in speed of sensory block onset and duration, or speed of motor block onset. However, peribulbar dexmedetomidine prolonged the motor block's duration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Peribulbar dexmedetomidine outperforms intravenous dexmedetomidine in terms of postoperative analgesia and motor block duration when used as an adjunct to peribulbar anesthesia for strabismus surgery. However, the intravenous group had significantly shorter surgical times.</p>","PeriodicalId":19841,"journal":{"name":"Pain physician","volume":"27 8","pages":"E819-E827"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intravenous Versus Peribulbar Dexmedetomidine as an Adjunct to Local Anesthetics in Strabismus Surgery: A Randomized, Double-blinded Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Huda F Ghazaly, Ibrahim E Hassan, Ahmed F Gabr, Taha T Dardeer, Mohamed A Alazhary\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dexmedetomidine has not been adequately studied as an adjuvant to peribulbar anesthesia in strabismus surgery.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We investigated how different routes of dexmedetomidine administration affect the peribulbar block characteristics in adults undergoing strabismus surgery.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A randomized, double-blind clinical trial. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee (approval number: 520/3/2021) and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05215158).</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The trial included 46 patients aged 20-60 years with an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System of  I or II who were scheduled for unilateral strabismus surgery at a university hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients were randomly assigned to an intravenous dexmedetomidine group (n = 15) who received 50 µg dexmedetomidine in 50 mL normal saline intravenously over 10 minutes, followed by a peribulbar block using a 10 mL mixture of 4 mL lidocaine 2%, 4 mL bupivacaine 0.5%, and 2 mL normal saline containing 150 international units (IU) hyaluronidase. The peribulbar dexmedetomidine group (n = 31) received 50 mL normal saline intravenously over 10 minutes, followed by a peribulbar block using a 10 mL mixture of 4 mL lidocaine 2%, 4 mL bupivacaine 0.5%, 1 mL normal saline with 150 IU hyaluronidase, and 1 mL normal saline containing 50 µg dexmedetomidine. Sensory and motor block onset and duration, analgesia duration, and patient and surgeon satisfaction were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Peribulbar dexmedetomidine prolonged the median duration of postoperative analgesia by 3.2 hours. Patients who received peribulbar dexmedetomidine benefitted from a longer time to request postoperative analgesia than those who got intravenous dexmedetomidine (7.17 ± 2.0 hours vs 5.79 ± 2.1 hours; P = 0.048). Motor block duration was longer in the peribulbar group compared to the intravenous group (198.34 ± 17.3 minutes vs 148.93 ± 13.7 minutes; P = 0.001). Patient and surgeon satisfaction was higher in the peribulbar dexmedetomidine group compared to the intravenous dexmedetomidine group (P = 0.048, P = 0.016, respectively). Strabismus surgery duration was shorter in the intravenous dexmedetomidine group than in the peribulbar group (38.01 ± 8.3 minutes vs 55.01 ± 11.9 minutes; P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Our study took place at a single-center with a small sample size limited to adult patients undergoing strabismus surgery. The study was not powered to identify differences in speed of sensory block onset and duration, or speed of motor block onset. However, peribulbar dexmedetomidine prolonged the motor block's duration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Peribulbar dexmedetomidine outperforms intravenous dexmedetomidine in terms of postoperative analgesia and motor block duration when used as an adjunct to peribulbar anesthesia for strabismus surgery. However, the intravenous group had significantly shorter surgical times.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain physician\",\"volume\":\"27 8\",\"pages\":\"E819-E827\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain physician\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain physician","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:右美托咪定在斜视手术中辅助球周麻醉的研究还不够充分。目的:研究右美托咪定不同给药途径对斜视手术患者球周阻滞特征的影响。研究设计:随机、双盲临床试验。该研究已获得机构伦理委员会批准(批准号:520/3/2021),并在ClinicalTrials.gov注册(NCT05215158)。环境:试验纳入46例年龄在20-60岁之间的患者,美国麻醉医师协会身体状态分类系统为I或II,计划在大学医院进行单侧斜视手术。方法:患者随机分为右美托咪定静脉注射组(n = 15),静脉注射50µg右美托咪定于50 mL生理盐水中,持续10分钟,随后用10 mL由2%利多卡因4 mL、0.5%布比卡因4 mL和含150国际单位(IU)透明质酸酶的生理盐水组成的混合物进行球周阻断。球周右美托咪定组(n = 31)静脉注射生理盐水50 mL,时间超过10分钟,然后用2%利多卡因4 mL、0.5%布比卡因4 mL、含150 IU透明质酸酶的生理盐水1 mL、含50µg右美托咪定的生理盐水10 mL的混合物进行球周阻滞。评估感觉和运动阻滞的发生和持续时间、镇痛持续时间以及患者和外科医生的满意度。结果:右美托咪定使球周术后中位镇痛时间延长3.2小时。接受球周右美托咪定治疗的患者比静脉注射右美托咪定的患者术后要求镇痛的时间更长(7.17±2.0小时vs 5.79±2.1小时);P = 0.048)。与静脉注射组相比,球周组的运动阻滞持续时间更长(198.34±17.3分钟vs 148.93±13.7分钟);P = 0.001)。右美托咪定球周组患者和外科医生的满意度高于静脉注射组(P = 0.048, P = 0.016)。右美托咪定静脉组斜视手术时间短于球周组(38.01±8.3 min vs 55.01±11.9 min);P < 0.001)。局限性:我们的研究是在单中心进行的,样本量小,仅限于接受斜视手术的成年患者。这项研究并没有确定感觉阻滞开始的速度和持续时间的差异,也没有确定运动阻滞开始的速度。然而,球周右美托咪定延长运动阻滞持续时间。结论:在斜视手术中,右美托咪定辅助球周麻醉在术后镇痛和运动阻滞持续时间方面优于静脉注射右美托咪定。然而,静脉注射组的手术时间明显缩短。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Intravenous Versus Peribulbar Dexmedetomidine as an Adjunct to Local Anesthetics in Strabismus Surgery: A Randomized, Double-blinded Clinical Trial.

Background: Dexmedetomidine has not been adequately studied as an adjuvant to peribulbar anesthesia in strabismus surgery.

Objectives: We investigated how different routes of dexmedetomidine administration affect the peribulbar block characteristics in adults undergoing strabismus surgery.

Study design: A randomized, double-blind clinical trial. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee (approval number: 520/3/2021) and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05215158).

Setting: The trial included 46 patients aged 20-60 years with an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System of  I or II who were scheduled for unilateral strabismus surgery at a university hospital.

Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to an intravenous dexmedetomidine group (n = 15) who received 50 µg dexmedetomidine in 50 mL normal saline intravenously over 10 minutes, followed by a peribulbar block using a 10 mL mixture of 4 mL lidocaine 2%, 4 mL bupivacaine 0.5%, and 2 mL normal saline containing 150 international units (IU) hyaluronidase. The peribulbar dexmedetomidine group (n = 31) received 50 mL normal saline intravenously over 10 minutes, followed by a peribulbar block using a 10 mL mixture of 4 mL lidocaine 2%, 4 mL bupivacaine 0.5%, 1 mL normal saline with 150 IU hyaluronidase, and 1 mL normal saline containing 50 µg dexmedetomidine. Sensory and motor block onset and duration, analgesia duration, and patient and surgeon satisfaction were evaluated.

Results: Peribulbar dexmedetomidine prolonged the median duration of postoperative analgesia by 3.2 hours. Patients who received peribulbar dexmedetomidine benefitted from a longer time to request postoperative analgesia than those who got intravenous dexmedetomidine (7.17 ± 2.0 hours vs 5.79 ± 2.1 hours; P = 0.048). Motor block duration was longer in the peribulbar group compared to the intravenous group (198.34 ± 17.3 minutes vs 148.93 ± 13.7 minutes; P = 0.001). Patient and surgeon satisfaction was higher in the peribulbar dexmedetomidine group compared to the intravenous dexmedetomidine group (P = 0.048, P = 0.016, respectively). Strabismus surgery duration was shorter in the intravenous dexmedetomidine group than in the peribulbar group (38.01 ± 8.3 minutes vs 55.01 ± 11.9 minutes; P < 0.001).

Limitations: Our study took place at a single-center with a small sample size limited to adult patients undergoing strabismus surgery. The study was not powered to identify differences in speed of sensory block onset and duration, or speed of motor block onset. However, peribulbar dexmedetomidine prolonged the motor block's duration.

Conclusion: Peribulbar dexmedetomidine outperforms intravenous dexmedetomidine in terms of postoperative analgesia and motor block duration when used as an adjunct to peribulbar anesthesia for strabismus surgery. However, the intravenous group had significantly shorter surgical times.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pain physician
Pain physician CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
21.60%
发文量
234
期刊介绍: Pain Physician Journal is the official publication of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP). The open access journal is published 6 times a year. Pain Physician Journal is a peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary, open access journal written by and directed to an audience of interventional pain physicians, clinicians and basic scientists with an interest in interventional pain management and pain medicine. Pain Physician Journal presents the latest studies, research, and information vital to those in the emerging specialty of interventional pain management – and critical to the people they serve.
×
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