Dexmedetomidine versus lidocaine as an adjuvant to general anesthesia for elective abdominal gynecological surgeries

被引:3
|
作者
Menshawi, Mohammed Abdelsalam [1 ]
Fahim, Hany Magdy [2 ]
机构
[1] Ain Shams Univ, Fac Med, 26 Ebn Fadlan St, Cairo, Egypt
[2] Ain Shams Univ, Fac Med, 42 Ebn Cotiba St,Elzohour Sq, Cairo, Egypt
关键词
Gynecological surgeries; Dexmedetomidine; Lidocaine; Hemodynamics; Anesthetic consumption; Postoperative analgesic demand; INTRAVENOUS LIDOCAINE; POSTOPERATIVE RECOVERY; INFUSION; ISOFLURANE; PROPOFOL; REQUIREMENTS; MORPHINE;
D O I
10.1186/s42077-019-0027-9
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Study objective: The current study was conducted to compare the effect of perioperative administration of intravenous dexmedetomidine versus lidocaine on the perioperative hemodynamic changes, anesthetic consumption, anesthesia induction, and recovery times in patients undergoing elective abdominal gynecological surgeries under general anesthesia. Materials and methods: Ninety female patients undergoing elective abdominal gynecological surgeries were enrolled in the current study. Patients were randomly distributed to one of three equal groups: group L received lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg loading, 2 mg/kg/h infusion), group D received dexmedetomidine (1 mu g/kg loading, 0.5 mu g/kg/h infusion), and group C received isotonic saline 0.9% in the same volume and pattern as the study drugs. Hemodynamic parameters including mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR), anesthetic consumption and induction, recovery times, and time to the first postoperative analgesic demand were recorded. Results: The MAP and HR after endotracheal intubation and in the subsequent recordings were significantly lower in group L and D when compared with group C with no significant difference between group D and L The propofol induction dose and mean end-tidal isoflurane concentration were significantly lower in group L and D when compared with group C and were also significantly lower in group D when compared with group L The intraoperative fentanyl consumption was significantly lower in group L and D when compared with group C with no significant difference between group D and L The anesthesia induction time was significantly shorter in group L and D when compared with group C; it was also significantly shorter in group D when compared with group L with no significant difference as regards the anesthesia recovery time and the response time between the three study groups. The time to the first postoperative analgesic requirement was significantly longer in group D and L when compared with group C; it was also significantly longer in group D when compared with group L. Conclusion: Both dexmedetomidine and lidocaine could be a useful adjuvant to general anesthesia in patients undergoing abdominal gynecological surgeries. However, dexmedetomidine has a better sparing effect on intraoperative anesthetic consumption and longer time to the first postoperative analgesic demand than that of lidocaine with no significant difference between both agents on intraoperative analgesic demand.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Dexmedetomidine versus lidocaine as an adjuvant to general anesthesia for elective abdominal gynecological surgeries
    Mohammed Abdelsalam Menshawi
    Hany Magdy Fahim
    Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology, 11
  • [2] The effect of intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine versus lidocaine as an analgesic adjuvant to balanced general anesthesia and enhanced recovery after abdominal surgery
    Ibrahim, Fatma Hassan
    Mohamed, Soheir Abbas
    Abd El Hamid, Hadeel Magdy
    Rabie, Amal Hamed
    El Derh, Maha Sadek
    AIN SHAMS JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2022, 14 (01)
  • [3] The effect of intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine versus lidocaine as an analgesic adjuvant to balanced general anesthesia and enhanced recovery after abdominal surgery
    Fatma Hassan Ibrahim
    Soheir Abbas Mohamed
    Hadeel Magdy Abd El Hamid
    Amal Hamed Rabie
    Maha Sadek El Derh
    Ain-Shams Journal of Anesthesiology, 14
  • [4] Efficacy and safety of intravenous dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to general anesthesia in gynecological surgeries: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Hung, Tsung-Yu
    Lin, Ying-Chun
    Wang, Yeou-Lih
    Lin, Mei-Chi
    TAIWANESE JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2023, 62 (02): : 239 - 251
  • [5] Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant during general anesthesia
    Obara, Shinju
    JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA, 2018, 32 (03) : 313 - 315
  • [6] Intravenous lidocaine as adjuvant to general anesthesia in renal surgery
    Nakhli, Mohamed Said
    Kahloul, Mohamed
    Guizani, Taieb
    Zedini, Chekib
    Chaouch, Ajmi
    Naija, Walid
    LIBYAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2018, 13
  • [7] Comparison of dexmedetomidine and clonidine as an adjuvant to ropivacaine for epidural anesthesia in lower abdominal and lower limb surgeries
    Arunkumar, Sruthi
    Kumar, Hemanth V. R.
    Krishnaveni, N.
    Ravishankar, M.
    Jaya, Velraj
    Aruloli, M.
    SAUDI JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2015, 9 (04) : 404 - 408
  • [8] Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant during general anesthesia
    Shinju Obara
    Journal of Anesthesia, 2018, 32 : 313 - 315
  • [9] Effects of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine Versus Lidocaine on Postoperative Pain, Analgesic Consumption and Functional Recovery After Abdominal Gynecological Surgery: A Randomized Placebo-controlled Double Blind Study
    Rekatsina, Martina
    Theodosopoulou, Polyxeni
    Staikou, Chryssoula
    PAIN PHYSICIAN, 2021, 24 (07) : E997 - E1006
  • [10] Comparison of Efficacy Outcomes of Lidocaine Spray, Topical Lidocaine Injection, and Lidocaine General Anesthesia in Nasal Bone Fractures Surgeries: A Randomized, Controlled Trial
    Zhu, Jihong
    Liu, Jian
    Shen, Guoying
    Zhong, Taidi
    Yu, Xin
    MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR, 2018, 24 : 4386 - 4394