Dataset Information

Fentanyl vs fentanyl-dexmedetomidine in lumbar foraminotomy surgery.

ABSTRACT: Aim:Lumbar foraminotomy surgery requires a potent opioid with short duration and rapid onset of action. In the present study we intended to compare the efficacy of fentanyl alone vs the combination of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl during lumbar foraminotomy surgery. Methods:The duration and requirements for first postoperative analgesics, hemodynamic stability, and respective side effects were studied. A prospective, randomized, double blind study of 40 patients (fentanyl group [Fen group] and fentanyl-dexmedetomidine group [Fen-Dex group], n=20 each) scheduled for lumbar foraminotomy surgery under pharmaceutical care intervention was carried out. Patients were classified as class I or II, according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification. Patients received intraoperative propofol, sevoflurane, atracurium, and either fentanyl loading dose of 1.0 ?g/kg and maintenance infusion dose of 0.2 ?g/kg/h in both groups. The patients of the Fen group received normal saline (0.9%) placebo, while the patients of the Fen-Dex group received dexmedetomidine infusion (0.5 ?g/kg/h) along with the fentanyl infusion. Postoperative morphine doses were given. Hemodynamic stability, pain, postoperative analgesia requirement, side effects of drugs, and other effects were monitored. Results:In the Fen-Dex group, the pain score was significantly less than in the Fen group (p<0.05). The time to first postoperative analgesia request was prolonged in the Fen-Dex group compared to the Fen group. On the other hand, requirement of morphine, and postoperative symptoms and episodes of nausea and vomiting were significantly greater in the Fen group than in the Fen-Dex group (p<0.05). Conclusion:The present study suggests the addition of dexmedetomidine during lumbar foraminotomy surgery at different levels would be beneficial to reduce morphine consumption and any adverse drug reaction.

SUBMITTER: Abdul Hadi B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6642633 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Fentanyl vs fentanyl-dexmedetomidine in lumbar foraminotomy surgery.

Abdul Hadi Bushra B Sbeitan Saleh M SM Shakya Ashok K AK

Therapeutics and clinical risk management 20190715

<h4>Aim</h4>Lumbar foraminotomy surgery requires a potent opioid with short duration and rapid onset of action. In the present study we intended to compare the efficacy of fentanyl alone vs the combination of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl during lumbar foraminotomy surgery.<h4>Methods</h4>The duration and requirements for first postoperative analgesics, hemodynamic stability, and respective side effects were studied. A prospective, randomized, double blind study of 40 patients (fentanyl group [Fe ...[more]

PMID: 31406463

Similar Datasets

Project description:Dexmedetomidine as a sole agent showed limited use for painful procedures due to its insufficient sedative/analgesic effect, pronounced hemodynamic instability and prolonged recovery. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine-ketamine (DK) versus dexmedetomidine-midazolam-fentanyl (DMF) combination on the quality of sedation/analgesia and recovery profiles for monitored anesthesia care (MAC).Fifty six patients undergoing chemoport insertion were randomly assigned to group DK or DMF. All patients received 1 μg.kg(-1) dexmedetomidine over 10 min followed by 0.2-1.0 μg.kg(-1)h(-1) in order to maintain 3 or 4 of modified Observer's Assessment of Analgesia and Sedation score checked every 3 min. At the start of dexmedetomidine infusion, patients in group DK or DMF received 0.5 mg.kg(-1) ketamine or 0.05 mg.kg(-1) midazolam + 0.5 μg.kg(-1) fentanyl intravenously, respectively. When required, rescue sedatives (0.5 mg.kg-1 of ketamine or 0.05 mg.kg-1 of midazolam) and analgesics (0.5 mg.kg-1 of ketamine or 0.5 μg.kg-1 of fentanyl) were given to the patients in DK or DMF group, respectively. The primary outcome of this study was the recovery parameters (time to spontaneous eye opening and the length of the recovery room stay). The secondary outcomes were parameters indicating quality of sedation/analgesia, cardiorespiratory variables, and satisfaction scores.There were no significant differences in the onset time, time to spontaneous eye opening, recovery room stay, the incidences of inadequate analgesia, hypotension and bradycardia between the two groups. Despite lower infusion rate of dexmedetomidine, more patients in the DMF group had bispectral index (BIS) < 60 than in the DK group and vice versa for need of rescue sedatives. The satisfaction scores of patients, surgeon, and anesthesiologist in the DMF group were significantly better than the DK group.The DK and DMF groups showed comparable recovery time, onset time, cardiorespiratory variables, and analgesia. However, the DMF group showed a better sedation quality and satisfaction scores despite the lower infusion rate of dexmedetomidine, and a higher incidence of BIS < 60 than the DK group.Clinical Trial Registry of Korea KCT0000951 , registered 12/12/2013.

Project description:Background:The literature on drugs used for combined general anesthesia and epidural analgesia (CGE) in lumbar operations is scarce. The purpose of the study was to compare the addition of either dexmedetomidine or fentanyl to bupivacaine for epidural analgesia in combination with general anesthesia with regard to efficacy and adverse events in such operations. Materials and Methods:This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was conducted on 80 patients who were scheduled for an elective lumbar disc operation, age 20-65 years, of either sex and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II. They were randomly allocated into one of the two groups - group bupivacaine-dexmedetomidine (BD) (n = 40): patients who received CGE with 15 mL of bupivacaine 0.20% plus 50 ?g of dexmedetomidine and group bupivacaine-fentanyl (BF) (n = 40): patients who received CGE with 15 mL of bupivacaine 0.20% plus 50 ?g fentanyl. The primary outcome was time to first analgesic requirement, whereas the secondary outcomes were the total opioid consumption and pain scores during the first 24 h. The incidence of adverse postoperative (PO) effects related to the study drugs, such as sedation, nausea and vomiting, pruritus, shivering, and respiratory depression, was also documented. Results:Patients in the BD group experienced a significantly prolonged pain-free period, lower total opioid consumption, and lower pain scores than patients in the BF group (P < 0.001). Patients in the BD group showed a significantly lower intraoperative heart rate and mean blood pressure (P < 0.001). Regarding adverse events, there were greater PO sedation scores (P < 0.001) and less frequent episodes of PO nausea and vomiting in the BD group. In addition, patients in the BD group showed less pruritis and shivering. There were no reported cases of respiratory depression in either group. Conclusion:CGE with bupivacaine plus dexmedetomidine provided better PO pain control than bupivacaine plus fentanyl, with fewer adverse events overall.

Project description:Despite the brevity of the procedure, bilateral myringotomy and tympanostomy tube placement (BMT) can result in significant postoperative pain and discomfort. As the procedure is frequently performed without intravenous access, non-parenteral routes of administration are frequently used for analgesia. The current study prospectively compares the efficacy of intranasal (IN) dexmedetomidine with IN fentanyl for children undergoing BMT.This prospective, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial included pediatric patients undergoing BMT. The patients were randomized to receive either IN dexmedetomidine (1 ?g/kg) or fentanyl (2 ?g/kg) after the induction of general anesthesia with sevoflurane. All patients received rectal acetaminophen (40 mg/kg) and the first 50 patients also received premedication with oral midazolam. Postoperative pain and recovery were assessed using pediatric pain and recovery scales, and any adverse effects were monitored for.The study cohort included 100 patients who ranged in age from 1 to 7.7 years and in weight from 8.6 to 37.4 kg. They were divided into 4 groups with 25 patients in each group: (1) midazolam premedication+IN dexmedetomidine; (2) midazolam premedication+IN fentanyl; (3) no premedication+IN dexmedetomidine; and (4) no premedication+IN fentanyl. Pain scores were comparable when comparing groups 2, 3 and 4, but were higher in group 1 (midazolam premedication with IN dexmedetomidine). There was no difference in total time in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) or time from arrival in the PACU until hospital discharge between the 4 groups. The heart rate (HR) was significantly lower in group 3 when compared to the other groups at several different times after arrival to the PACU. No clinically significant difference was noted in blood pressure.Following BMT, when no premedication is administered, there was no clinical advantage when comparing IN dexmedetomidine (1 ?g/kg) to IN fentanyl (2 ?g/kg). The addition of oral midazolam as a premedication worsened the outcome measures particularly for children receiving IN dexmedetomidine.

Project description:BackgroundTo investigate the optimal dose of pretreated-dexmedetomidine in fentanyl-induced cough (FIC) suppression.MethodsPatients of 180 undergoing elective surgery with general anesthesia, aged 18-65 years, BMI 18.5-30 kg/m2, ASA I or II, were equally randomized into four groups (n = 45) to receive intravenous pretreatment of dexmedetomidine with 0 (group 1), 0.3 (group 2), 0.6 (group 3) and 0.9 (group 4) mcg/kg over 10 mins, respectively. After the pretreatment, all patients were given a 5-s intravenous injection of fentanyl 4 mcg/kg. The symptoms of irritating cough including the severity and onset time were recorded for 1 min after fentanyl injection. General anesthesia induction was completed with midazolam, propofol and cisatracurium, then endotracheal tube or laryngeal mask was inserted and connected to an anesthesia machine. MAP, HR and SpO2 at the beginning of pretreatment (T0), 3 min (T1), 6 min (T2), 9 min (T3) and 12 min (T4) after the beginning of pretreatment were recorded. Side effects of dexmedetomidine, such as bradycardia, hypertension, hypotension, and respiratory depression were also recorded during the course.ResultsTotally 168 patients completed the study. The incidences of cough were 52.4, 42.9, 11.9, and 14.3% in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively, with no significant differences between groups 1 and 2 (P > 0.05) and between groups 3 and 4 (P > 0.05). The incidence and severity of cough in groups 3 and 4 were significantly lower than those in groups 1 and 2 (P < 0.05). Compared to T0, HR at T2 (P < 0.05), T3 (P < 0.01), and T4 (P < 0.01) decreased significantly and MAP at T4 decreased significantly (P < 0.05) in group 4. Bradycardia occurred in 1 case and respiratory depression occurred in 1 case in group 4. Compared to group 1, the onset time of cough in the other 3 groups were delayed significantly (P < 0.05).ConclusionPretreated dexmedetomidine 0.6 mcg/kg blous intravenous infusion over 10 mins could reduce FIC effectively without side effects.Trial registrationThis study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03126422), April 13, 2017.

Dataset Information

Fentanyl vs fentanyl-dexmedetomidine in lumbar foraminotomy surgery.

Publications

Fentanyl vs fentanyl-dexmedetomidine in lumbar foraminotomy surgery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets