Dexmedetomidina en CAM/Dexmedetomidine in monitored anesthesia care

Agosto 15, 2015. No. 2055

Comparación de dexmedetomidina en cuidado anestésico monitorizado vs anestesia espinal encirugía de várices The comparison of monitored anesthesia care with dexmedetomidine and spinal anesthesia during varicose vein surgery. Moon EJ, Kang KW, Chung JY, Kang JM, Park JH, Joh JH, Park HC, Yi JW. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2014 Nov;87(5):245-52. Abstract PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of monitored anesthesia care (MAC) using dexmedetomidine for its sedative and analgesic effect during varicose vein surgery. METHODS: Forty-two patients, who underwent varicose vein surgery, were divided into the MAC group (n = 20) or the spinal anesthesia group (n = 22) for randomized clinical trial. In the MAC group, dexmedetomidine was administered by a loading dose of 1 µg/kg for 10 minutes, followed by a maintenance infusion of 0.2-1.0 µg/kg/hr. Ketamine was used for intermittent injection. In the spinal anesthesia group, midazolam was used for sedation. Intraoperative vital signs, the number of adverse events, and the satisfaction of patients and surgeons concerning the anesthetic condition were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Systolic blood pressure was intraoperatively significantly different over time between the two groups. The groups had statistical differences in the change in heart rate with regard to time. In the postanesthetic care unit, patients and surgeons in the MAC group had a lower satisfaction score, compared to patients and surgeons in the spinal anesthesia group. However, in the recovery period, patients had a positive perception concerning MAC anesthesia. In addition, without significant adverse events, the MAC group had a shorter time to possible ambulation, which indicated an early recovery. CONCLUSION: We believe that MAC using dexmedetomidine in combination with ketamine may be an alternative anesthetic technique for varicose vein surgery with regard to a patient's preference and medical condition. KEYWORDS: Dexmedetomidine; Monitored anesthesia care; Sedation; Spinal anesthesia PDF  La dexmedetomidina aminora el cuidado anestésico monitorizado Dexmedetomidine ameliorates monitored anaesthesia care. Gupta P, Joshi S, Jethava D, Kumar A. Indian J Anaesth. 2014 Mar;58(2):154-9. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.130816. Abstract BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Monitored anaesthesia care (MAC) is meant for procedures under local anaesthesia. Various drugs have been used for this purpose. The recently introduced alpha2 agonist, dexmedetomidine provides "conscious sedation" with adequate analgesia and minimal respiratory depression. Hence, the safety and efficacy of two doses of dexmedetomidine for sedation and analgesia were evaluated. METHODS: A total of 90 patients were distributed in three groups of 30 each: Dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg (DL), dexmedetomidine 1.0 μg/kg (DH) and normal saline (C). The initial loading dose was followed by maintenance infusion of 0.2-0.7 μg/kg/h of dexmedetomidine or equivalent volume of saline. Study drug was started at least 15 min before placement of local anaesthesia. Drugs were titrated to a target level of sedation (=3 on Ramsay sedation scale [RSS]). Midazolam 0.02 mg/kg for RSS < 3 and fentanyl 0.5 μg/kg were supplemented as required. The statistical analysis was performed using Chi-square test and mean and anova analysis. RESULTS: In groups DL and DH fewer patients required supplemental midazolam, 56.7% (17/30) and 40% (12/30), compared with control, where 86.7% (26/30)needed midazolam supplements. P = 0.000. Both groups DL and DH required significantly less fentanyl (84.8 and 83.9 μg) versus control (144.2 μg). There was significantly increased ease of achieving and maintaining targeted sedation and analgesia in both dexmedetomidine groups when compared with placebo (P = 0.001). Adverse events observed with dexmedetomidine were bradycardia and hypotension. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine in the doses studied was considered safe and effective sedative and analgesic for patients undergoing procedures under MAC. KEYWORDS: Conscious sedation; dexmedetomidine; monitored anaesthesia care; respiratory depression PDF   Estudio prospectivo, aleatorizado, doble ciego comparando dexmedetomidina vs. midazolam-fentanilo para timpanoplastía en cuidado anestésico monitorizado A prospective randomized double-blind study comparing dexmedetomidine vs. combination of midazolam-fentanyl for tympanoplasty surgery under monitored anesthesia care. Parikh DA, Kolli SN, Karnik HS, Lele SS, Tendolkar BA. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013 Apr;29(2):173-8. doi: 10.4103/0970-9185.111671. Abstract BACKGROUND: Analgesia and sedation are usually required for the comfort of the patient and surgeon during tympanoplasty surgery done under local anesthesia. In this study, satisfaction scores and effectiveness of sedation and analgesia with dexmedetomidine were compared with a combination of midazolam-fentanyl. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety patients undergoing tympanoplasty under local anesthesia randomly received either IV dexmedetomidine 1 μg kg(-1) over 10 min followed by 0.2 μg kg(-1)h(-1) infusion (Group D) or IV midazolam 0.06 mg kg(-1) plus IV fentanyl 1 μg kg(-1) over 10 min (Group MF) followed by normal saline infusion at 0.2 ml kg(-1)h(-1). Sedation was titrated to Ramsay sedation score (RSS) of three. Vital parameters, rescue analgesics (fentanyl 1 μg kg(-1)) and sedatives (midazolam 0.01 mg kg(-1)), patient and surgeon satisfaction scores were recorded. RESULTS: Patient and surgeon satisfaction score was better in Group D than Group MF (median interquartile range (IQR) 9 (8-10) vs. 8 (6.5-9.5) and 9 (8.5-9.5) vs. 8 (6.75-9.25), P = 0.0001 for both). Intraoperative heart rate and mean arterial pressure in Group D were lower than the baseline values and the corresponding values in Group MF (P < 0.05). Percentage of patients requiring rescue fentanyl was higher in Group MF than Group D (40% vs. 11.1%, P = 0.01). One patient in Group D while four in Group MF (8.8%) required rescue sedation with midazolam (P > 0.17). Seven patients in Group D had dry mouth vs. none in Group MF (P = 0.006). One patient in Group D had bradycardia with hypotension which was effectively treated. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine is comparable to midazolam-fentanyl for sedation and analgesia in tympanoplasty with better surgeon and patient satisfaction. Hemodynamics need to be closely monitored. KEYWORDS: Dexmedetomidine; midazolam fentanyl sedation; monitored anesthesia care; otological; satisfaction scores; sedation; surgery PDF

Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor 52 664 6848905 vwhizar@anestesia-dolor.org anestesia-dolor.org Copyright © 2015