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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |