Abstract No.: ABS0738: Comparison of Analgesic Effect of Ropivacaine Versus Ropivacaine with Dexmedetomidine Used for Caudal Epidural Block in Patients Undergoing Lumbosacral Spine Surgery Under General Anaesthesia; A Randomised Double Blind Interventional Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Challenging aspect of spine surgery is to provide extended postop analgesia.In this study we aimed to determine the analgesic effects of Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to Ropivacaine versus Ropivacaine alone for caudal epidural block in patients undergoing lumbosacral spine surgery under general anaesthesia. METHODS: Hospital based, prospective, randomized double blind interventional study. A sample of 30 cases in each group was adequateat 95% confidence and 80% power to verify the expected minimum difference of 0.8(±0.7) in VAS score at 8 hourspostoperative period in both groups. Patients were divided in two groups.Group A: (n=30):patients received 18 ml of 0.2% Inj. ropivacaine with 2 ml of normal saline in caudal epidural space.Group B: (n=30): patient received 18 ml of 0.2% Inj. ropivacaine with 2 mL (1 µg/kg) of Inj. dexmedetomidine in caudal epidural space. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant difference observed with respect to demographic data (age, sex, weight), ASA, haemodynamic parameters, sedation and side effects in both groups.The time to first rescue analgesia was significantly prolonged(hours) (mean±SD) in Group B (25.00±4.33) as compared to Group A (15.13±1.74) with P value <0.001. Mean VAS scores were significantly lower in Group B as compared to Group A at 4,8 and 12 hours postoperatively with P value <0.001 CONCLUSION: Inj. Dexmedetomidine 1 µg/kg added to 0.2% ropivacaine provided longer postoperative analgesia than 0.2% ropivacaine alone.Hence we concluded that Dexmedetomidine is an effective analgesic as an adjuvant to 0.2% ropivacaine in caudal epidural block