Cargando…

Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery

BACKGROUND: Perioperative pain management is a major challenge for anaesthesiologists. IV lidocaine and dexmedetomidine have been utilised for peri-operative pain management. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To analyse the effects of intraoperative intravenous lignocaine/dexmedetomidine on pain relief, opioid c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Singh, Vishwadeep, Pahade, Akhilesh, Mowar, Ashita
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9813992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36620103
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/aer.aer_121_22
_version_ 1784864035799302144
author Singh, Vishwadeep
Pahade, Akhilesh
Mowar, Ashita
author_facet Singh, Vishwadeep
Pahade, Akhilesh
Mowar, Ashita
author_sort Singh, Vishwadeep
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Perioperative pain management is a major challenge for anaesthesiologists. IV lidocaine and dexmedetomidine have been utilised for peri-operative pain management. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To analyse the effects of intraoperative intravenous lignocaine/dexmedetomidine on pain relief, opioid consumption, peri-operative hemodynamic and side-effect profiles/unique interactions in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective, interventional, single-centric, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, Helsinki protocol-compliant clinical study was conducted on 90 ASA I/II class patients aged 18-60 yrs. This Patients were block-randomised to Group-L (2% Lignocaine), Group-D (dexmedetomidine) and Group C (Control/Placebo/0.9% normal saline). Hemodynamic were noted at pre-defined time frames intra-/post-operatively. Post-operative VAS score and Richmond Agitation Sedation Score monitoring was done. RESULTS: Demographic parameters of were comparable. Mean intra-operative fentanyl consumption amongst the three groups were 20.5 ± 20.05 mcg, 26.5 ± 17.57 mcg and 46.83 + 21.31 mcg (Group-L, Group-D, Group-C; P value Group-L vs Group-D:0.22, Group L/D vs Group C: <0.0001). Group-D exhibited the lower heart rates and MAP (P < 0.05). Extubation- First rescue analgesic phase was comparable for the Group-C and Group-L (59.17 ± 46.224 min vs 61.64 ± 53.819 min) and significantly greater in Group-D (136.07 + 55.350 min; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Both Dexmedetomidine and lignocaine can be useful intra-operative pain relief adjuncts. Dexmedetomidine delayed First rescue analgesic and total analgesic consumption more than lignocaine. Dexmedetomidine patients exhibited bradycardia intraoperatively more than the other groups. we recommend, Dexmedetomidine in the intra-operative phase and lignocaine in the post-operative phase can be an alternative in patients who are poor candidates for post-operative opioids/sedation/contraindicated regional anaesthesia regimes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9813992
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98139922023-01-06 Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery Singh, Vishwadeep Pahade, Akhilesh Mowar, Ashita Anesth Essays Res Original Article BACKGROUND: Perioperative pain management is a major challenge for anaesthesiologists. IV lidocaine and dexmedetomidine have been utilised for peri-operative pain management. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To analyse the effects of intraoperative intravenous lignocaine/dexmedetomidine on pain relief, opioid consumption, peri-operative hemodynamic and side-effect profiles/unique interactions in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective, interventional, single-centric, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, Helsinki protocol-compliant clinical study was conducted on 90 ASA I/II class patients aged 18-60 yrs. This Patients were block-randomised to Group-L (2% Lignocaine), Group-D (dexmedetomidine) and Group C (Control/Placebo/0.9% normal saline). Hemodynamic were noted at pre-defined time frames intra-/post-operatively. Post-operative VAS score and Richmond Agitation Sedation Score monitoring was done. RESULTS: Demographic parameters of were comparable. Mean intra-operative fentanyl consumption amongst the three groups were 20.5 ± 20.05 mcg, 26.5 ± 17.57 mcg and 46.83 + 21.31 mcg (Group-L, Group-D, Group-C; P value Group-L vs Group-D:0.22, Group L/D vs Group C: <0.0001). Group-D exhibited the lower heart rates and MAP (P < 0.05). Extubation- First rescue analgesic phase was comparable for the Group-C and Group-L (59.17 ± 46.224 min vs 61.64 ± 53.819 min) and significantly greater in Group-D (136.07 + 55.350 min; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Both Dexmedetomidine and lignocaine can be useful intra-operative pain relief adjuncts. Dexmedetomidine delayed First rescue analgesic and total analgesic consumption more than lignocaine. Dexmedetomidine patients exhibited bradycardia intraoperatively more than the other groups. we recommend, Dexmedetomidine in the intra-operative phase and lignocaine in the post-operative phase can be an alternative in patients who are poor candidates for post-operative opioids/sedation/contraindicated regional anaesthesia regimes. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022 2022-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9813992/ /pubmed/36620103 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/aer.aer_121_22 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Anesthesia: Essays and Researches https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Singh, Vishwadeep
Pahade, Akhilesh
Mowar, Ashita
Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery
title Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery
title_full Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery
title_fullStr Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery
title_full_unstemmed Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery
title_short Comparing Efficacy of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine on Perioperative Analgesic Consumption in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery
title_sort comparing efficacy of intravenous dexmedetomidine and lidocaine on perioperative analgesic consumption in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9813992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36620103
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/aer.aer_121_22
work_keys_str_mv AT singhvishwadeep comparingefficacyofintravenousdexmedetomidineandlidocaineonperioperativeanalgesicconsumptioninpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgery
AT pahadeakhilesh comparingefficacyofintravenousdexmedetomidineandlidocaineonperioperativeanalgesicconsumptioninpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgery
AT mowarashita comparingefficacyofintravenousdexmedetomidineandlidocaineonperioperativeanalgesicconsumptioninpatientsundergoinglaparoscopicsurgery