Cargando…
Monitored anaesthesia care - Comparison of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine/propofol for middle ear surgeries: A double-blind randomised trial
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Middle ear surgeries (MESs) are usually performed under sedation with local anaesthesia and can be well tolerated by the patient with minimal discomfort. In the present study, we compare the effect of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine combination with nalbuphine/propofol on sedation an...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5296810/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28216706 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.198403 |
_version_ | 1782505627512209408 |
---|---|
author | Nallam, Srinivasa Rao Chiruvella, Sunil Reddy, Anjineswar |
author_facet | Nallam, Srinivasa Rao Chiruvella, Sunil Reddy, Anjineswar |
author_sort | Nallam, Srinivasa Rao |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Middle ear surgeries (MESs) are usually performed under sedation with local anaesthesia and can be well tolerated by the patient with minimal discomfort. In the present study, we compare the effect of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine combination with nalbuphine/propofol on sedation and analgesia in monitored anaesthesia care. METHODS: One hundred adult patients undergoing MESs under monitored anaesthesia care (MAC) were randomly allocated into two groups. All patients in both groups received injection nalbuphine 50 μg/kg intravenously (IV). Group D received a bolus dose of injection dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg IV over 10 min followed by an infusion started at 0.4 μg/kg/h IV. Group P received a bolus dose of injection propofol 0.75 mg/kg followed by an infusion started at 0.025 mg/kg/min IV. Sedation was titrated to Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS) of 3. Patient's mean arterial pressure, heart rate, saturation peripheral pulse and need for intraoperative rescue sedation/analgesia were recorded and compared. The data analysis was carried out with Z test and Chi-square test. RESULTS: Mean RSS was significantly more in Group D (4.24 ± 1.54) as compared to Group P (2.58 ± 0.95). Overall VAS score was also significantly less in Group D (3.5 ± 1.7) than in Group P (5.4 ± 1.8). In total, 16 patients (32%) in Group D had hypotension whereas 7 patients (14%) only in Group P had hypotension. CONCLUSION: Nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine combination is superior to nalbuphine/propofol in producing sedation and decreasing VAS in patients undergoing MESs under MAC. Better surgeon and patient satisfaction were observed with nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine. Haemodynamics need to be closely monitored. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5296810 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-52968102017-02-17 Monitored anaesthesia care - Comparison of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine/propofol for middle ear surgeries: A double-blind randomised trial Nallam, Srinivasa Rao Chiruvella, Sunil Reddy, Anjineswar Indian J Anaesth Original Article BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Middle ear surgeries (MESs) are usually performed under sedation with local anaesthesia and can be well tolerated by the patient with minimal discomfort. In the present study, we compare the effect of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine combination with nalbuphine/propofol on sedation and analgesia in monitored anaesthesia care. METHODS: One hundred adult patients undergoing MESs under monitored anaesthesia care (MAC) were randomly allocated into two groups. All patients in both groups received injection nalbuphine 50 μg/kg intravenously (IV). Group D received a bolus dose of injection dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg IV over 10 min followed by an infusion started at 0.4 μg/kg/h IV. Group P received a bolus dose of injection propofol 0.75 mg/kg followed by an infusion started at 0.025 mg/kg/min IV. Sedation was titrated to Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS) of 3. Patient's mean arterial pressure, heart rate, saturation peripheral pulse and need for intraoperative rescue sedation/analgesia were recorded and compared. The data analysis was carried out with Z test and Chi-square test. RESULTS: Mean RSS was significantly more in Group D (4.24 ± 1.54) as compared to Group P (2.58 ± 0.95). Overall VAS score was also significantly less in Group D (3.5 ± 1.7) than in Group P (5.4 ± 1.8). In total, 16 patients (32%) in Group D had hypotension whereas 7 patients (14%) only in Group P had hypotension. CONCLUSION: Nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine combination is superior to nalbuphine/propofol in producing sedation and decreasing VAS in patients undergoing MESs under MAC. Better surgeon and patient satisfaction were observed with nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine. Haemodynamics need to be closely monitored. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5296810/ /pubmed/28216706 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.198403 Text en Copyright: © Indian 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-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Nallam, Srinivasa Rao Chiruvella, Sunil Reddy, Anjineswar Monitored anaesthesia care - Comparison of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine/propofol for middle ear surgeries: A double-blind randomised trial |
title | Monitored anaesthesia care - Comparison of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine/propofol for middle ear surgeries: A double-blind randomised trial |
title_full | Monitored anaesthesia care - Comparison of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine/propofol for middle ear surgeries: A double-blind randomised trial |
title_fullStr | Monitored anaesthesia care - Comparison of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine/propofol for middle ear surgeries: A double-blind randomised trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Monitored anaesthesia care - Comparison of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine/propofol for middle ear surgeries: A double-blind randomised trial |
title_short | Monitored anaesthesia care - Comparison of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine/propofol for middle ear surgeries: A double-blind randomised trial |
title_sort | monitored anaesthesia care - comparison of nalbuphine/dexmedetomidine versus nalbuphine/propofol for middle ear surgeries: a double-blind randomised trial |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5296810/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28216706 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.198403 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nallamsrinivasarao monitoredanaesthesiacarecomparisonofnalbuphinedexmedetomidineversusnalbuphinepropofolformiddleearsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomisedtrial AT chiruvellasunil monitoredanaesthesiacarecomparisonofnalbuphinedexmedetomidineversusnalbuphinepropofolformiddleearsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomisedtrial AT reddyanjineswar monitoredanaesthesiacarecomparisonofnalbuphinedexmedetomidineversusnalbuphinepropofolformiddleearsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomisedtrial |