European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020
The effect of dexmedetomidine on spinal anesthesia quality and hemodynamic changes in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair surgery: intravenous versus intrathecal.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Khosravi Fatemeh, Sadeghi Niloofar, Jarineshin Hashem
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of spinal anesthesia and hemodynamic parameters of intravenous versus intrathecal dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair surgery under spinal anesthesia.
METHODS: Fifty male patients aged 18-70 years with ASA I and II were randomly divided into two groups of 25 patients receiving either intravenous (1 μg/kg infused during 10 min before blockade) or intrathecal (5 μg, added to local anesthetics) dexmedetomidine. The duration of analgesia, sensory and motor blockade levels, the score of pain intensity, post-operative analgesic usage and the level of sedation as well as hemodynamic changes, and complications were recorded.
RESULTS: The duration of analgesia in the intrathecal group was significantly longer than intravenous group (403.588 ± 93.706 vs. 274.048 ± 47.266 min; P < 0.001). Duration of the sensory and motor blockade were significantly longer in intrathecal than intravenous group (230.440 ± 26.494 vs. 181.400 ± 28.850 min; P < 0.001 for sensory block, and 253.800 ± 32.637 vs. 205.400 ± 30.921 min; P < 0.001 for motor block). The score of pain intensity was lower in the intrathecal group in the post-operative period (3.680 ± 1.680 vs. 5.520 ± 1.901; P = 0.001 and 2.360 ± 1.320 vs. 3.24 ± 1.69; P = 0.041, respectively, for the time 6 and 12). Ramsay sedation score was higher in the intravenous group during surgery but it was higher in intrathecal group during recovery room period (P < 0.05). Moreover, the incidence of bradycardia was significantly lower in the intrathecal group (0% vs. 36% respectively; P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Administration of intrathecal dexmedetomidine along with local anesthetics can be recommended to increase the quality of spinal anesthesia with minimal complications.
METHODS: Fifty male patients aged 18-70 years with ASA I and II were randomly divided into two groups of 25 patients receiving either intravenous (1 μg/kg infused during 10 min before blockade) or intrathecal (5 μg, added to local anesthetics) dexmedetomidine. The duration of analgesia, sensory and motor blockade levels, the score of pain intensity, post-operative analgesic usage and the level of sedation as well as hemodynamic changes, and complications were recorded.
RESULTS: The duration of analgesia in the intrathecal group was significantly longer than intravenous group (403.588 ± 93.706 vs. 274.048 ± 47.266 min; P < 0.001). Duration of the sensory and motor blockade were significantly longer in intrathecal than intravenous group (230.440 ± 26.494 vs. 181.400 ± 28.850 min; P < 0.001 for sensory block, and 253.800 ± 32.637 vs. 205.400 ± 30.921 min; P < 0.001 for motor block). The score of pain intensity was lower in the intrathecal group in the post-operative period (3.680 ± 1.680 vs. 5.520 ± 1.901; P = 0.001 and 2.360 ± 1.320 vs. 3.24 ± 1.69; P = 0.041, respectively, for the time 6 and 12). Ramsay sedation score was higher in the intravenous group during surgery but it was higher in intrathecal group during recovery room period (P < 0.05). Moreover, the incidence of bradycardia was significantly lower in the intrathecal group (0% vs. 36% respectively; P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Administration of intrathecal dexmedetomidine along with local anesthetics can be recommended to increase the quality of spinal anesthesia with minimal complications.