A Prospective Randomized Comparative Study of Anaesthetic and Analgesic Advantages of Dexmedetomidine Versus Saline Infusion for Spine Surgery in Prone Position Under General Anaesthesia
Authors/Creators
- 1. Assistant Professor, Department of Anaesthesia, Kanachur Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
- 2. Professor, Department of Anaesthesia, Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College and the King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
- 3. Senior Resident, Department of Anaesthesia, Kanachur Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
- 4. Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesia, Kanachur Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
Description
Background: In this study, we wanted to evaluate the anaesthetic and analgesic advantages of dexmedetomidine with that of saline infusion for spine surgery in prone position under general anaesthesia. Methods: This was a hospital based randomized prospective comparative study conducted among 60 patients who presented with thoracic spine surgeries of duration 3-4 hours under general anaesthesia, in the Department of General Anaesthesia in Seth G S Medical College, KEM Hospital, Mumbai from 2013 to 2014 after obtaining clearance from Institutional Ethics Committee and written informed consent from the study participants. Results: The sex distribution in both the groups was analysed using Pearson chi square test and the difference was not statistically significant. The mean isoflurane requirement in group D was 0.89±0.14 whereas that in group C was 1.04±0.11. The difference in mean was statistically significant with p value < 0.001. This shows that dexmedetomidine infusion in group D decreases the isoflurane requirement. Inj. vecuronium in group D patient was 12±1.64 mg and that in group C patients was 13.66±1.21mg. There was statistically significant difference in the requirement of Inj. vecuronium between two groups. Less requirement of Inj. vecuronium in group D patients indicated that dexmedetomidine infusion decreases the requirement of Inj. vecuronium. The mean requirement of injection fentanyl in group D patients was 140.33±17.90mgm where in as that in group C patients was 117.50±29.07mgm. There was statistically significant difference in fentanyl requirement between both the groups with p value < 0.001. Decrease in the requirement of Inj. fentanyl in group D patients was because of analgesic action of dexmedetomidine infusion. No difference was seen with regard to requirement of Inj. atropine between two groups. Inj. Ephedrine requirement was compared between group D and group C using Chi square test. There was no significant difference in the requirement of Inj. Ephedrine. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine attenuates the pressure response to laryngoscopy, incision and extubation. Dexmedetomidine’s hypotensive effect reduces the bleeding at surgical site. We can conclude that dexmedetomidine infusion is good anaesthetic adjuvant in spine surgery under general anaesthesia in view of its hemodynamic stability, anaesthetic and analgesic sparing effect.
Abstract (English)
Background: In this study, we wanted to evaluate the anaesthetic and analgesic advantages of dexmedetomidine with that of saline infusion for spine surgery in prone position under general anaesthesia. Methods: This was a hospital based randomized prospective comparative study conducted among 60 patients who presented with thoracic spine surgeries of duration 3-4 hours under general anaesthesia, in the Department of General Anaesthesia in Seth G S Medical College, KEM Hospital, Mumbai from 2013 to 2014 after obtaining clearance from Institutional Ethics Committee and written informed consent from the study participants. Results: The sex distribution in both the groups was analysed using Pearson chi square test and the difference was not statistically significant. The mean isoflurane requirement in group D was 0.89±0.14 whereas that in group C was 1.04±0.11. The difference in mean was statistically significant with p value < 0.001. This shows that dexmedetomidine infusion in group D decreases the isoflurane requirement. Inj. vecuronium in group D patient was 12±1.64 mg and that in group C patients was 13.66±1.21mg. There was statistically significant difference in the requirement of Inj. vecuronium between two groups. Less requirement of Inj. vecuronium in group D patients indicated that dexmedetomidine infusion decreases the requirement of Inj. vecuronium. The mean requirement of injection fentanyl in group D patients was 140.33±17.90mgm where in as that in group C patients was 117.50±29.07mgm. There was statistically significant difference in fentanyl requirement between both the groups with p value < 0.001. Decrease in the requirement of Inj. fentanyl in group D patients was because of analgesic action of dexmedetomidine infusion. No difference was seen with regard to requirement of Inj. atropine between two groups. Inj. Ephedrine requirement was compared between group D and group C using Chi square test. There was no significant difference in the requirement of Inj. Ephedrine. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine attenuates the pressure response to laryngoscopy, incision and extubation. Dexmedetomidine’s hypotensive effect reduces the bleeding at surgical site. We can conclude that dexmedetomidine infusion is good anaesthetic adjuvant in spine surgery under general anaesthesia in view of its hemodynamic stability, anaesthetic and analgesic sparing effect.
Files
IJPCR,Vol14,Issue12,Article112.pdf
Files
(367.2 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:71e3834ea375a24e712ee6f1374d97c4
|
367.2 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2022-12-23
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/14/IJPCR,Vol14,Issue12,Article112.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Mohamed HS, Asida SM, Salman OH. Dexmedetomidine versus nimodipine for controlled hypotension during spine surgery. Egyptian J Anaesth 2013; 29(4):325-31. 2. Bekker A, Sturaitis MK. Dexmedetomidine for neurological surgery. Operative Neurosurgery 2005; 57(Suppl_1):1-0. 3. Yildiz M, Tavlan A, Tuncer S, Reisli R, Yosunkaya A, Otelcioglu S. Effect of dexmedetomidine on haemodyna mic responses to laryngoscopy and intubation. Drugs in R & D 2006;7(1) :43-52. 4. Bakhamees HS, El-Halafawy YM, ElKerdawy HM, Gouda NM, Altemyatt S. Effects of dexmedetomidine in morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic gastric bypass. Middle East J Anaesthesiol 2007;19(3):537- 51. 5. Keniya VM, Ladi S, Naphade R. Dexmedetomidine attenuates sympathoadrenal response to tracheal intubation and reduces perioperative anaesthetic requirement. Indian J Anaesth 2011;55(4):352. 6. Bekker A, Sturaitis M, Bloom M, Moric M, Golfinos J, Parker E, et al. The effect of dexmedetomidine on perioperative hemodynamics in patients undergoing craniotomy. Anesth Analg 2008;107(4):1340-7. 7. Tanskanen PE, Kyttä JV, Randell TT, Aantaa RE. Dexmedetomidine as an anaesthetic adjuvant in patientsundergoing intracranial tumour surgery: a double-blind, randomized and placebo-controlled study. BJA: Br J Anaesth 2006;97(5):658-65. 8. Chakroborty B., Parvin S., Hossain M. M., & Hossain, M. J. SelfExamination of Breast of the Students of Nursing College in Bangladesh. Journal of Medical Research and Health Sciences. 2022; 5(12): 2339– 2344.