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
  • [41] Compare the Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine and Tramadol in Preventing Intraoperative Shivering in Patients Undergoing Elective Lower Abdominal Surgeries Under Subarachnoid Block
    Sathyamoorthy, Valli
    Subramanian, Amudhavan
    Karmegam, Gomathi
    Anandan, Heber
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC STUDY, 2016, 4 (05) : 65 - 69
  • [42] Balanced opioid-free anesthesia with lidocaine and esketamine versus balanced anesthesia with sufentanil for gynecological endoscopic surgery: a randomized controlled trial
    Hu, Yang
    Zhang, Qing-yun
    Qin, Guan-chao
    Zhu, Guo-hong
    Long, Xiang
    Xu, Jin-fei
    Gong, Yuan
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2024, 14 (01):
  • [43] The value of local dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to ultrasound-guided wide awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) in flexor tendon repair surgeries: a randomized controlled trial
    Mahmoud Mohammed Alseoudy
    Elsayed Mohamed Abdelkarime
    Khaled Nour
    May Elsherbiny Badr
    BMC Anesthesiology, 24
  • [44] The value of local dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to ultrasound-guided wide awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) in flexor tendon repair surgeries: a randomized controlled trial
    Alseoudy, Mahmoud Mohammed
    Abdelkarime, Elsayed Mohamed
    Nour, Khaled
    Badr, May Elsherbiny
    BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [45] Comparison of subcutaneous dexmedetomidine versus clonidine as an adjuvant to spinal anesthesia: a randomized double blind control trial
    Srinivas, Divya B.
    Lakshminarasimhaiah, Geetha
    LOCAL AND REGIONAL ANESTHESIA, 2019, 12 : 29 - 36
  • [46] Efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol for anesthesia induction in adult patients received elective surgeries: a meta‑analysis
    Dilireba Ainiwaer
    Wanwei Jiang
    BMC Anesthesiology, 24
  • [47] Intravenous Dexmedetomidine versus Intravenous Esmolol in Blunting the Laryngoscopy Response in Adult Normotensives Undergoing Elective Surgeries: A Randomised Clinical Trial
    Jemmie, Johns Rachel
    Vidya, M. V.
    Sivakumar, Segaran
    Nagalakshmi, P.
    Ranjan, R., V
    Sagiev, George Koshy
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2022, 16 (06) : UC56 - UC61
  • [48] Comparison of lidocaine versus dexmedetomidine in preventing propofol induced injection pain during induction of general anaesthesia in Chinese patient undergoing gynaecologic surgery: real world evidence
    He, Yan-bin
    Li, Du-yu
    Tan, Zhong
    BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH-INDIA, 2017, 28 (04): : 1890 - 1893
  • [49] Dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl added to bupivacaine for epidural analgesia in combination with general anesthesia for elective lumbar disc operations: A prospective, randomized double-blinded study
    Alansary, Amin Mohammed
    Elbeialy, Marwa Ahmed Khairy
    SAUDI JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2019, 13 (02) : 119 - 125
  • [50] Comparison of regional anesthesia versus combined regional and general anesthesia for elective carotid endarterectomy: A small exploratory study
    Luchetti, Marco
    Canella, Massimo
    Zoppi, Marco
    Massei, Riccardo
    REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2008, 33 (04) : 340 - 345