Cargando…
A Comparison of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine and Neostigmine as Adjuvant to Ropivacaine for Lower Limb Surgeries: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Study
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to compare the analgesic effects of intrathecal ropivacaine with or without neostigmine or dexmedetomidine in lower limb surgeries. Secondary objectives were to study the characteristics of block, duration of analgesia, postoperative analgesic requi...
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/PMC5735500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29284861 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/aer.AER_62_17 |
_version_ | 1783287218142445568 |
---|---|
author | Singh, Ashutosh Kumar Kumar, Abhyuday Kumar, Ashok Prasad, Braj Kishore Tiwary, Pradeep Kumar Kumar, Ranjeet |
author_facet | Singh, Ashutosh Kumar Kumar, Abhyuday Kumar, Ashok Prasad, Braj Kishore Tiwary, Pradeep Kumar Kumar, Ranjeet |
author_sort | Singh, Ashutosh Kumar |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to compare the analgesic effects of intrathecal ropivacaine with or without neostigmine or dexmedetomidine in lower limb surgeries. Secondary objectives were to study the characteristics of block, duration of analgesia, postoperative analgesic requirement, and associated side effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five patients posted for elective orthopedic lower limb surgeries under spinal anesthesia were randomly divided into three equal groups to receive intrathecal ropivacaine 0.5% alone (Group R), with adjuvant 5 μg dexmedetomidine (Group R + D) or 50 μg neostigmine (Group R + N). Time to achieve T10 sensory block, time to 2-segment regression, duration of regression to L4, maximum modified Bromage score and duration of analgesia were noted. The incidences of adverse events such as nausea, vomiting, hypotension, bradycardia, desaturation, shivering, and itching were also noted. Statistical analysis was performed using two sample t-test for normally distributed variables and Pearson's Chi-squared test for categorical data. The level of significance was set as P < 0.05. RESULTS: Quality of motor and sensory blockage was significantly better in both Group R + D and Group R + N than Group R. Mean time to achieve T10 sensory block was lowest, time taken in regression of block by 2-segments and duration of regression to L4 was longest in Group R + D and was significant when compared to other groups. Adverse effects such as nausea and vomiting were highest in Group R + N and was statistically significant as compared to other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine is a better intrathecal adjuvant emerged as compared to neostigmine due to faster onset of anesthesia, better intra- and post-operative analgesia and prolonged duration of motor and sensory blockade without significant increase in adverse effects. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5735500 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57355002017-12-28 A Comparison of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine and Neostigmine as Adjuvant to Ropivacaine for Lower Limb Surgeries: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Study Singh, Ashutosh Kumar Kumar, Abhyuday Kumar, Ashok Prasad, Braj Kishore Tiwary, Pradeep Kumar Kumar, Ranjeet Anesth Essays Res Original Article OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to compare the analgesic effects of intrathecal ropivacaine with or without neostigmine or dexmedetomidine in lower limb surgeries. Secondary objectives were to study the characteristics of block, duration of analgesia, postoperative analgesic requirement, and associated side effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-five patients posted for elective orthopedic lower limb surgeries under spinal anesthesia were randomly divided into three equal groups to receive intrathecal ropivacaine 0.5% alone (Group R), with adjuvant 5 μg dexmedetomidine (Group R + D) or 50 μg neostigmine (Group R + N). Time to achieve T10 sensory block, time to 2-segment regression, duration of regression to L4, maximum modified Bromage score and duration of analgesia were noted. The incidences of adverse events such as nausea, vomiting, hypotension, bradycardia, desaturation, shivering, and itching were also noted. Statistical analysis was performed using two sample t-test for normally distributed variables and Pearson's Chi-squared test for categorical data. The level of significance was set as P < 0.05. RESULTS: Quality of motor and sensory blockage was significantly better in both Group R + D and Group R + N than Group R. Mean time to achieve T10 sensory block was lowest, time taken in regression of block by 2-segments and duration of regression to L4 was longest in Group R + D and was significant when compared to other groups. Adverse effects such as nausea and vomiting were highest in Group R + N and was statistically significant as compared to other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine is a better intrathecal adjuvant emerged as compared to neostigmine due to faster onset of anesthesia, better intra- and post-operative analgesia and prolonged duration of motor and sensory blockade without significant increase in adverse effects. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5735500/ /pubmed/29284861 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/aer.AER_62_17 Text en Copyright: © 2017 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-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 Singh, Ashutosh Kumar Kumar, Abhyuday Kumar, Ashok Prasad, Braj Kishore Tiwary, Pradeep Kumar Kumar, Ranjeet A Comparison of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine and Neostigmine as Adjuvant to Ropivacaine for Lower Limb Surgeries: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Study |
title | A Comparison of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine and Neostigmine as Adjuvant to Ropivacaine for Lower Limb Surgeries: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Study |
title_full | A Comparison of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine and Neostigmine as Adjuvant to Ropivacaine for Lower Limb Surgeries: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Study |
title_fullStr | A Comparison of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine and Neostigmine as Adjuvant to Ropivacaine for Lower Limb Surgeries: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Study |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparison of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine and Neostigmine as Adjuvant to Ropivacaine for Lower Limb Surgeries: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Study |
title_short | A Comparison of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine and Neostigmine as Adjuvant to Ropivacaine for Lower Limb Surgeries: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Study |
title_sort | comparison of intrathecal dexmedetomidine and neostigmine as adjuvant to ropivacaine for lower limb surgeries: a double-blind randomized controlled study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5735500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29284861 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/aer.AER_62_17 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT singhashutoshkumar acomparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT kumarabhyuday acomparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT kumarashok acomparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT prasadbrajkishore acomparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT tiwarypradeepkumar acomparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT kumarranjeet acomparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT singhashutoshkumar comparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT kumarabhyuday comparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT kumarashok comparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT prasadbrajkishore comparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT tiwarypradeepkumar comparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy AT kumarranjeet comparisonofintrathecaldexmedetomidineandneostigmineasadjuvanttoropivacaineforlowerlimbsurgeriesadoubleblindrandomizedcontrolledstudy |