Cargando…
A comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging
AIM: To compare the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging procedures. METHODS: Sixty children between the age of 1 to 7 years were randomly distributed into two groups: The dexmedetomidine (D) group received 1...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168348/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21957410 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.84105 |
_version_ | 1782211372846678016 |
---|---|
author | Dave, Jaydev Vaghela, Sandip |
author_facet | Dave, Jaydev Vaghela, Sandip |
author_sort | Dave, Jaydev |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: To compare the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging procedures. METHODS: Sixty children between the age of 1 to 7 years were randomly distributed into two groups: The dexmedetomidine (D) group received 1 μg/kg initial dose followed by continuous infusion of 0.5 μg/kg/h, and the propofol group (P) received 3 mg/kg initial dose, followed by a continuous infusion of 100 μg/kg/min. Inadequate sedation was defined as difficulty in completing the procedure because of the child's movement during magnetic resonance imaging. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate, peripheral oxygen saturation, and respiratory rate (RR) were recorded during the study. RESULT: The onset of sedation, recovery, and discharge time were significantly shorter in group P than in group D. MAP, heart rate, and RR decreased during sedation from the baseline values in both groups. MAP and RR were significantly lower in group P than in group D during sedation. Dexmedetomidine and propofol provided adequate sedation in most of the children. CONCLUSION: We conclude that although propofol provided faster anesthetic induction and recovery times, it caused hypotension and desaturation. Dexmedetomidine could be an alternative, reliable sedative drug to propofol in selected patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3168348 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Medknow Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-31683482011-09-28 A comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging Dave, Jaydev Vaghela, Sandip Saudi J Anaesth Original Article AIM: To compare the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging procedures. METHODS: Sixty children between the age of 1 to 7 years were randomly distributed into two groups: The dexmedetomidine (D) group received 1 μg/kg initial dose followed by continuous infusion of 0.5 μg/kg/h, and the propofol group (P) received 3 mg/kg initial dose, followed by a continuous infusion of 100 μg/kg/min. Inadequate sedation was defined as difficulty in completing the procedure because of the child's movement during magnetic resonance imaging. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate, peripheral oxygen saturation, and respiratory rate (RR) were recorded during the study. RESULT: The onset of sedation, recovery, and discharge time were significantly shorter in group P than in group D. MAP, heart rate, and RR decreased during sedation from the baseline values in both groups. MAP and RR were significantly lower in group P than in group D during sedation. Dexmedetomidine and propofol provided adequate sedation in most of the children. CONCLUSION: We conclude that although propofol provided faster anesthetic induction and recovery times, it caused hypotension and desaturation. Dexmedetomidine could be an alternative, reliable sedative drug to propofol in selected patients. Medknow Publications 2011 /pmc/articles/PMC3168348/ /pubmed/21957410 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.84105 Text en Copyright: © Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Dave, Jaydev Vaghela, Sandip A comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging |
title | A comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging |
title_full | A comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging |
title_fullStr | A comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging |
title_short | A comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging |
title_sort | comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168348/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21957410 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.84105 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT davejaydev acomparisonofthesedativehemodynamicandrespiratoryeffectsofdexmedetomidineandpropofolinchildrenundergoingmagneticresonanceimaging AT vaghelasandip acomparisonofthesedativehemodynamicandrespiratoryeffectsofdexmedetomidineandpropofolinchildrenundergoingmagneticresonanceimaging AT davejaydev comparisonofthesedativehemodynamicandrespiratoryeffectsofdexmedetomidineandpropofolinchildrenundergoingmagneticresonanceimaging AT vaghelasandip comparisonofthesedativehemodynamicandrespiratoryeffectsofdexmedetomidineandpropofolinchildrenundergoingmagneticresonanceimaging |