The effect of dexmedetomidine on spinal anesthesia quality and hemodynamic changes in patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair surgery: intravenous versus intrathecal

被引:10
作者
Khosravi, Fatemeh [1 ,2 ]
Sadeghi, Niloofar [1 ]
Jarineshin, Hashem [1 ]
机构
[1] Hormozgan Univ Med Sci, Anesthesiol Crit Care & Pain Management Res Ctr, Bandar Abbas, Iran
[2] Hormozgan Univ Med Sci, Fac Med, Dept Physiol, Bandar Abbas, Iran
关键词
Dexmedetomidine; Inguinal hernia; Spinal anesthesia; BUPIVACAINE;
D O I
10.1007/s00228-020-02870-8
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
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 mu g/kg infused during 10 min before blockade) or intrathecal (5 mu g, 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.
引用
收藏
页码:923 / 928
页数:6
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [11] Jarineshin H, 2016, Anesth Pain Med, V6, DOI [10.5812/aapm.39495, DOI 10.5812/AAPM.39495]
  • [12] Kaya FN, 2010, CAN J ANAESTH, V57, P39, DOI 10.1007/s12630-009-9231-6
  • [13] Effects of dexmedetomidine on isoflurane requirements in healthy volunteers. 1: Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interactions
    Khan, ZP
    Munday, IT
    Jones, RM
    Thornton, C
    Mant, TG
    Amin, D
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1999, 83 (03) : 372 - 380
  • [14] Khosravi Fatemeh, 2019, Med Arch, V73, P44, DOI 10.5455/medarh.2019.73.44-48
  • [15] Effects of dexmedetomidine infusion during spinal anesthesia on hemodynamics and sedation
    Kilic, Ebru Tarikci
    Aydin, Gaye
    [J]. LIBYAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2018, 13
  • [16] Effects of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine on Low-Dose Bupivacaine Spinal Anesthesia in Elderly Patients Undergoing Transurethral Prostatectomy
    Kim, Ji Eun
    Kim, Na Young
    Lee, Hye Sun
    Kil, Hae Keum
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL & PHARMACEUTICAL BULLETIN, 2013, 36 (06) : 959 - 965
  • [17] Magdy H, 2015, Ain-Shams J Anesthesiol, V8, P93, DOI [10.4103/1687-7934.153949, DOI 10.4103/1687-7934.153949]
  • [18] Effects of low dose dexmedetomidine infusion on haemodynamic stress response, sedation and post-operative analgesia requirement in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy
    Manne, Gourishankar Reddy
    Upadhyay, Mahendra R.
    Swadia, V. N.
    [J]. INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2014, 58 (06) : 726 - 731
  • [19] Miller R.D., 2011, BASICS ANESTHESIA E
  • [20] Effects of Intravenous and Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine in Spinal Anesthesia: A Meta-Analysis
    Niu, Xiao-Yin
    Ding, Xi-Bing
    Guo, Ting
    Chen, Ming-Hui
    Fu, Shu-Kun
    Li, Quan
    [J]. CNS NEUROSCIENCE & THERAPEUTICS, 2013, 19 (11) : 897 - 904