Cargando…

Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet (SOS). METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with cervical trauma or severe cervical spondylosis undergoing cervical spinal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xu, Ting, Li, Min, Ni, Cheng, Guo, Xiang-yang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4970200/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27484783
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-016-0219-9
_version_ 1782445934710358016
author Xu, Ting
Li, Min
Ni, Cheng
Guo, Xiang-yang
author_facet Xu, Ting
Li, Min
Ni, Cheng
Guo, Xiang-yang
author_sort Xu, Ting
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet (SOS). METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with cervical trauma or severe cervical spondylosis undergoing cervical spinal surgery were enrolled in this prospective study. They were randomly assigned to receive dexmedetomidine (Group D) or remifentanil (Group R). In Group D, the patients received an intravenous loading dose of dexmedetomidine 1 μg · kg(−1) over 10 min followed by a continuous infusion of 0.7 μg · kg(−1) · h(−1). In Group R, a target-controlled infusion of remifentanil was administered to achieve a plasma concentration of 2.5 ng · ml(−1), increased to 3 ng · ml(−1) 10 min later. An endotracheal tube was inserted using a SOS under dexmedetomidine or remifentanil sedation after topical anesthesia to the airway. Midazolam was given as rescue sedation. We recorded the first attempt intubation success rate, the dose of midazolam, duration of intubation, Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) score, tracheal tube tolerance score, duration of drug infusion, adverse events and patient satisfaction score. RESULTS: The RSS score was significantly higher in Group D than in Group R. First attempt success rate, rescue midazolam dose and the duration of intubation did not differ between the groups. Patients in Group R were significantly more tolerant of the tracheal tube. The incidence of hypoxia was significantly higher in Group R than Group D, but there was no significant difference in the incidence of other adverse events between the groups. The hemodynamic responses of the two groups were similar, but more patients in Group R were able to recall airway instrumentation. CONCLUSIONS: Both dexmedetomidine and remifentanil are effective sedatives for awake intubation using an SOS. Although the first attempt success rates were similar, patients sedated with remifentanil tolerated the tracheal tube better after intubation with moderately increased risk of desaturation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.chictr.org.cn; ChiCTR-TRC-13003052 (February 4th, 2013).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4970200
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49702002016-08-03 Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial Xu, Ting Li, Min Ni, Cheng Guo, Xiang-yang BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet (SOS). METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with cervical trauma or severe cervical spondylosis undergoing cervical spinal surgery were enrolled in this prospective study. They were randomly assigned to receive dexmedetomidine (Group D) or remifentanil (Group R). In Group D, the patients received an intravenous loading dose of dexmedetomidine 1 μg · kg(−1) over 10 min followed by a continuous infusion of 0.7 μg · kg(−1) · h(−1). In Group R, a target-controlled infusion of remifentanil was administered to achieve a plasma concentration of 2.5 ng · ml(−1), increased to 3 ng · ml(−1) 10 min later. An endotracheal tube was inserted using a SOS under dexmedetomidine or remifentanil sedation after topical anesthesia to the airway. Midazolam was given as rescue sedation. We recorded the first attempt intubation success rate, the dose of midazolam, duration of intubation, Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) score, tracheal tube tolerance score, duration of drug infusion, adverse events and patient satisfaction score. RESULTS: The RSS score was significantly higher in Group D than in Group R. First attempt success rate, rescue midazolam dose and the duration of intubation did not differ between the groups. Patients in Group R were significantly more tolerant of the tracheal tube. The incidence of hypoxia was significantly higher in Group R than Group D, but there was no significant difference in the incidence of other adverse events between the groups. The hemodynamic responses of the two groups were similar, but more patients in Group R were able to recall airway instrumentation. CONCLUSIONS: Both dexmedetomidine and remifentanil are effective sedatives for awake intubation using an SOS. Although the first attempt success rates were similar, patients sedated with remifentanil tolerated the tracheal tube better after intubation with moderately increased risk of desaturation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.chictr.org.cn; ChiCTR-TRC-13003052 (February 4th, 2013). BioMed Central 2016-08-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4970200/ /pubmed/27484783 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-016-0219-9 Text en © Xu et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Xu, Ting
Li, Min
Ni, Cheng
Guo, Xiang-yang
Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial
title Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial
title_full Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial
title_fullStr Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial
title_short Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a Shikani optical stylet: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial
title_sort dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil for sedation during awake intubation using a shikani optical stylet: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4970200/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27484783
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-016-0219-9
work_keys_str_mv AT xuting dexmedetomidineversusremifentanilforsedationduringawakeintubationusingashikaniopticalstyletarandomizeddoubleblindedcontrolledtrial
AT limin dexmedetomidineversusremifentanilforsedationduringawakeintubationusingashikaniopticalstyletarandomizeddoubleblindedcontrolledtrial
AT nicheng dexmedetomidineversusremifentanilforsedationduringawakeintubationusingashikaniopticalstyletarandomizeddoubleblindedcontrolledtrial
AT guoxiangyang dexmedetomidineversusremifentanilforsedationduringawakeintubationusingashikaniopticalstyletarandomizeddoubleblindedcontrolledtrial