Monitored Anesthesia Care with Dexmedetomidine: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Trial

被引:167
|
作者
Candiotti, Keith A. [1 ]
Bergese, Sergio D. [2 ,3 ]
Bokesch, Paula M. [4 ]
Feldman, Marc A. [5 ]
Wisemandle, Wayne [4 ]
Bekker, Alex Y. [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Miami, Dept Anesthesiol Perioperat Med & Pain Management, Div Perioperat Med, Miami, FL 33101 USA
[2] Ohio State Univ, Dept Anesthesiol, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[3] Ohio State Univ, Dept Neurol Surg, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[4] Hospira Inc, Lake Forest, IL USA
[5] Cleveland Clin, Sect Anesthesia, Cole Eye Inst, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[6] NYU, Dept Anesthesiol, Med Ctr, New York, NY 10016 USA
关键词
CATARACT-SURGERY; INTENSIVE-CARE; SEDATION; MIDAZOLAM; RECOVERY; PROPOFOL; PATIENT; EFFICACY; SCALE;
D O I
10.1213/ane.0b013e3181ae0856
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is increasingly being used as a sedative for monitored anesthesia care (MAC) because of its analgesic properties, "cooperative sedation," and lack of respiratory depression. In this randomized, multicenter, double-blind, Phase III Food and Drug Administration Study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of two doses of DEX for sedation of patients undergoing a broad range Of Surgical or diagnostic procedures requiring MAC. METHODS: Three hundred twenty-six patients were randomized 2:2:1 to DEX 0.5 mu g/kg, DEX 1 mu g/kg, or saline placebo initial loading dose, followed by a maintenance infusion of 0.2-1.0 mu g . kg(-1) . h(-1) of DEX (or equivalent volume of saline) titrated to a targeted level of sedation (:54 on the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale [OAA/S]). Study drug was started at least 15 min before placement of regional or local anesthetic block. Midazolam was given for OAA/S >4 and fentanyl for pain. The primary end-point was the percentage of patients not requiring rescue midazolam. RESULTS: Significantly fewer patients in the 0.5- and 1-mu g/kg DEX groups required supplemental midazolam compared with placebo (59.7% [80/134], 45.7% [59/129] vs 96.8% [61/63], respectively; P < 0.001) and at lower doses to achieve an OAA/S <= 4 before and during surgery compared with the saline group (1.4 and 0.9 mg vs; 4.1 mg, respectively; P < 0.001, each group compared with placebo). Both DEX groups required significantly less fentanyl (84.8 and 83.6 mu g vs 1.44.4 mu g, respectively; P < 0.001, for both DEX groups versus placebo) for all surgical subtypes. Anesthesiologists indicated significantly increased ease of achieving and maintaining targeted sedation in both DEX groups compared with placebo with midazolam (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was significantly higher with DEX (P <= 0.009, both groups versus placebo). Common adverse events with DEX were protocol-defined bradycardia and hypotension that were predominately mild to moderate in severity. The incidence of clinically significant respiratory depression (defined as a respiratory rate of <8 or M oxygen saturation of <90%) was lower in DEX-treated patients (P = 0.018, for both groups versus placebo). CONCLUSIONS: DEX is an effective baseline sedative for patients undergoing MAC for a broad range of surgical procedures providing better patient satisfaction, less opioid requirements, and less respiratory depression than placebo rescued with midazolam and fentanyl. (Anesth Analg 2010;110:47-56)
引用
收藏
页码:47 / 56
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Addition of Dexmedetomidine to Propofol Anesthesia for Middle-Ear Surgeries: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study
    Kumari, Swathi
    Thippeswamy, H. G.
    Nayak, Shruthi R.
    V. Torgal, Shrirang
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2024, 16 (08)
  • [2] Sedation During Noninvasive Mechanical Ventilation With Dexmedetomidine or Midazolam: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Prospective Study
    Senoglu, Nimet
    Oksuz, Hafize
    Dogan, Zafer
    Yildiz, Huseyin
    Demirkiran, Hilmi
    Ekerbicer, Hasan
    CURRENT THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, 2010, 71 (03): : 141 - 153
  • [3] Randomized double-blind study of remifentanil and dexmedetomidine for flexible bronchoscopy
    Ryu, J. H.
    Lee, S. W.
    Lee, J. H.
    Lee, E. H.
    Do, S. H.
    Kim, C. S.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2012, 108 (03) : 503 - 511
  • [4] The comparison of monitored anesthesia care with dexmedetomidine and spinal anesthesia during varicose vein surgery
    Moon, Eun-Jin
    Kang, Ki-Woon
    Chung, Jun-Young
    Kang, Jong-Man
    Park, Je-Hoon
    Joh, Jin-Hyun
    Park, Ho-Chul
    Yi, Jae-Woo
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL TREATMENT AND RESEARCH, 2014, 87 (05) : 245 - 252
  • [5] Dexmedetomidine-remifentanil vs propofol-remifentanil for monitored anesthesia care during hysteroscopy Randomized, single-blind, controlled trial
    Park, Seongjoo
    Choi, Soo-Lyoen
    Nahm, Francis Sahngun
    Ryu, Jung-Hee
    Do, Sang-Hwan
    MEDICINE, 2020, 99 (43) : E22712
  • [6] Comparison of a loading dose of dexmedetomidine combined with propofol or sevoflurane for hemodynamic changes during anesthesia maintenance: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial
    Han, Yuan
    Han, Liu
    Dong, Mengmeng
    Sun, Qingchun
    Ding, Ke
    Zhang, Zhenfeng
    Cao, Junli
    Zhang, Yueying
    BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2018, 18
  • [7] Comparison Between Esketamine and Alfentanil for Hysteroscopy: A Prospective, Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial
    Weng, Mengcao
    Wang, Dongdong
    Zhong, Jia
    Qian, Minyue
    Zhang, Kai
    Jin, Yue
    DRUG DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND THERAPY, 2024, 18 : 3629 - 3641
  • [8] Combined use of dexmedetomidine and propofol in monitored anesthesia care: a randomized controlled study
    Kim, Kyu Nam
    Lee, Hee Jong
    Kim, Soo Yeon
    Kim, Ji Yoon
    BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2017, 17
  • [9] Comparison of dexmedetomidine and midazolam for monitored anesthesia care combined with tramadol via patient-controlled analgesia in endoscopic nasal surgery: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, clinical study
    Karaaslan, Kazim
    Yilmaz, Fahrettin
    Gulcu, Nebahat
    Colak, Cemil
    Sereflican, Murat
    Kocoglu, Hasan
    CURRENT THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, 2007, 68 (02): : 69 - 81
  • [10] A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial of 3 Regimens for Sedation and Analgesia After Cardiac Surgery
    Oliver, William C., Jr.
    Nuttall, Gregory A.
    Murari, Terri
    Bauer, Lori K.
    Johnsrud, Kelly H.
    Long, Kirsten J. Hall
    Orszulak, Thomas A.
    Schaff, Hartzell V.
    Hanson, Andrew C.
    Schroeder, Darrell R.
    Ereth, Mark H.
    Abel, Martin D.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2011, 25 (01) : 110 - 119