Cargando…
A study to compare the overall effectiveness between midazolam and dexmedetomidine during monitored anesthesia care: A randomized prospective study
BACKGROUND: Monitored anesthesia care (MAC) combines intravenous sedation along with local anesthetic infiltration or nerve block. Several drugs have been used for MAC, but all are associated with complications. Dexmedetomidine is a selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist with both sedative and analgesic...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4563974/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26417122 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0259-1162.156299 |
_version_ | 1782389359764307968 |
---|---|
author | Rasheed, Mohd. Asim Punera, Dinesh Chandra Bano, Mehar Palaria, Urmila Tyagi, Abhilasha Sharma, Shatrunjay |
author_facet | Rasheed, Mohd. Asim Punera, Dinesh Chandra Bano, Mehar Palaria, Urmila Tyagi, Abhilasha Sharma, Shatrunjay |
author_sort | Rasheed, Mohd. Asim |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Monitored anesthesia care (MAC) combines intravenous sedation along with local anesthetic infiltration or nerve block. Several drugs have been used for MAC, but all are associated with complications. Dexmedetomidine is a selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist with both sedative and analgesic properties and is devoid of respiratory depressant effects. Its short elimination half-life makes it an attractive agent for sedation during MAC. AIM: Comparative evaluation of dexmedetomidine and midazolam for MAC. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind study, 50 American Society of Anesthesiologist I and II patients undergoing a surgical or diagnostic procedure of <1 h requiring MAC were enrolled. Dexmedetomidine-ketamine (Group “KD”) patients (n = 25) received intravenous (I.V.) dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg over 10 min followed by 0.5 mg/kg of I.V. ketamine. Midazolam-ketamine patients (n = 25) received I.V. midazolam 0.05 mg/kg over 10 min followed by 0.5 mg/kg of I.V. ketamine to get a targeted level of sedation (≤4 using Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale score). Inadequate sedation (e.g., 15% increase in mean arterial blood pressure or heart rate, decrease in degree of calmness, increase in respiratory rate, physical movement) was treated by a ketamine bolus of 0.5 mg/kg as a rescue analgesia. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The statistical tests used in the study are unpaired Student's t-test for continuous variables and Chi-square test for categorical variables. Mann–Whitney test was used to assess the patient and surgeon satisfaction. Data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Value of P < 0.05 is considered significant and P < 0.0001 as highly significant. RESULTS: Clinically desired sedation and analgesia was achieved earlier and better with dexmedetomidine. Patients and surgeons satisfaction were significantly higher with dexmedetomidine. The requirement of additional sedation and analgesia was less in dexmedetomidine (KD) group. CONCLUSION: During MAC dexmedetomidine provides better sedation and analgesia than midazolam. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4563974 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45639742015-09-28 A study to compare the overall effectiveness between midazolam and dexmedetomidine during monitored anesthesia care: A randomized prospective study Rasheed, Mohd. Asim Punera, Dinesh Chandra Bano, Mehar Palaria, Urmila Tyagi, Abhilasha Sharma, Shatrunjay Anesth Essays Res Original Article BACKGROUND: Monitored anesthesia care (MAC) combines intravenous sedation along with local anesthetic infiltration or nerve block. Several drugs have been used for MAC, but all are associated with complications. Dexmedetomidine is a selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist with both sedative and analgesic properties and is devoid of respiratory depressant effects. Its short elimination half-life makes it an attractive agent for sedation during MAC. AIM: Comparative evaluation of dexmedetomidine and midazolam for MAC. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind study, 50 American Society of Anesthesiologist I and II patients undergoing a surgical or diagnostic procedure of <1 h requiring MAC were enrolled. Dexmedetomidine-ketamine (Group “KD”) patients (n = 25) received intravenous (I.V.) dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg over 10 min followed by 0.5 mg/kg of I.V. ketamine. Midazolam-ketamine patients (n = 25) received I.V. midazolam 0.05 mg/kg over 10 min followed by 0.5 mg/kg of I.V. ketamine to get a targeted level of sedation (≤4 using Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale score). Inadequate sedation (e.g., 15% increase in mean arterial blood pressure or heart rate, decrease in degree of calmness, increase in respiratory rate, physical movement) was treated by a ketamine bolus of 0.5 mg/kg as a rescue analgesia. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The statistical tests used in the study are unpaired Student's t-test for continuous variables and Chi-square test for categorical variables. Mann–Whitney test was used to assess the patient and surgeon satisfaction. Data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Value of P < 0.05 is considered significant and P < 0.0001 as highly significant. RESULTS: Clinically desired sedation and analgesia was achieved earlier and better with dexmedetomidine. Patients and surgeons satisfaction were significantly higher with dexmedetomidine. The requirement of additional sedation and analgesia was less in dexmedetomidine (KD) group. CONCLUSION: During MAC dexmedetomidine provides better sedation and analgesia than midazolam. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4563974/ /pubmed/26417122 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0259-1162.156299 Text en Copyright: © Anesthesia: Essays and Researches 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 Rasheed, Mohd. Asim Punera, Dinesh Chandra Bano, Mehar Palaria, Urmila Tyagi, Abhilasha Sharma, Shatrunjay A study to compare the overall effectiveness between midazolam and dexmedetomidine during monitored anesthesia care: A randomized prospective study |
title | A study to compare the overall effectiveness between midazolam and dexmedetomidine during monitored anesthesia care: A randomized prospective study |
title_full | A study to compare the overall effectiveness between midazolam and dexmedetomidine during monitored anesthesia care: A randomized prospective study |
title_fullStr | A study to compare the overall effectiveness between midazolam and dexmedetomidine during monitored anesthesia care: A randomized prospective study |
title_full_unstemmed | A study to compare the overall effectiveness between midazolam and dexmedetomidine during monitored anesthesia care: A randomized prospective study |
title_short | A study to compare the overall effectiveness between midazolam and dexmedetomidine during monitored anesthesia care: A randomized prospective study |
title_sort | study to compare the overall effectiveness between midazolam and dexmedetomidine during monitored anesthesia care: a randomized prospective study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4563974/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26417122 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0259-1162.156299 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rasheedmohdasim astudytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT puneradineshchandra astudytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT banomehar astudytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT palariaurmila astudytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT tyagiabhilasha astudytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT sharmashatrunjay astudytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT rasheedmohdasim studytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT puneradineshchandra studytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT banomehar studytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT palariaurmila studytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT tyagiabhilasha studytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy AT sharmashatrunjay studytocomparetheoveralleffectivenessbetweenmidazolamanddexmedetomidineduringmonitoredanesthesiacarearandomizedprospectivestudy |