INTRODUCTION:Clonidine is an α2 agonist agent that has been used as an adjuvant to local anaesthetics in regional anaesthesia.AIM:This study compared two combinations of bupivacaine and clonidine with bupivacaine alone for surgeries below the level of umbilicus in spinal anaesthesia.MATERIALS AND METHODS:We conducted a randomized double blind study on 90 patients of ASA I and ASA II aged 20-60 years, 30 in each group, undergoing surgery below the level of umbilicus in spinal anaesthesia. For intrathecal block, Group 1 received bupivacaine hydrochloride 12.5mg (2.5ml) in 8% dextrose (0.5% sensorcaine heavy) + 1ml (150μg) of preservative free clonidine. Group 2 received bupivacaine hydrochloride 12.5mg (2.5ml) in dextrose (0.5% sensorcaine heavy) + 0.5ml (75μg) of preservative free clonidine + 0.5ml of normal saline to make the volumes of all the groups same. Group 3 received bupivacaine hydrochloride 2.5ml in 8% dextrose (0.5% sensorcaine heavy) + 1ml of normal saline to make the volumes of all the groups same. Heart rate, NIBP, oxygen saturation and respiratory rate were monitored. The onset and duration of sensory block, the highest dermatomal level of sensory block, motor block, time to complete motor block recovery and duration of spinal anaesthesia were recorded.STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:The data of the study was recorded in the record chart and results were evaluated using statistical tests (ANOVA test, post-hoc turkey hsd test, paired t-test and chi-square test).RESULTS:Demographic data, the incidence and duration of bradycardia were comparable amongst the groups. The duration of sensory and motor block were greatest in group 1, followed by group 2 and group 3 (p <0.01). Decrease in the systolic blood pressure of group 2 and group 3 was noted as compared to group 1. No significant sedation or respiratory depression was observed in any group.CONCLUSION: Addition of clonidine to bupivacaine intrathecally is although a reliable method to prolong spinal anaesthesia but close monitoring for hypotension is desirable.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) anaesthesia is being increasingly used for effective post-operative analgesia. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of epidural clonidine on characteristics of spinal anaesthesia for gynaecological surgeries.METHODS:This was a prospective randomised, double-blind, controlled study involving sixty patients belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I and II who underwent gynaecological surgeries were randomly divided into clonidine (C) group and saline (S) group of thirty each. All patients received CSE anaesthesia. Ten minutes before subarachnoid block (SAB), Group C received clonidine 150 μg diluted to 5 ml in normal saline (NS) and Group S received NS epidurally. Hyperbaric bupivacaine (15 mg) was administered intrathecally for both groups after epidural injection. Sensory and motor block characteristics, analgesia, sedation and haemodynamics were observed. Statistical analysis was performed using appropriate tests.RESULTS:Epidural clonidine produced faster onset (37.83 ± 8.58 s in Group C compared to 50.33 ± 8.80 s in Group S, P = 0.001) and prolonged duration of sensory block (241.17±18.65 minutes in group C compared to 150.33±19.16 minutes in group S, P = 0.001). Time for two segment regression of sensory block was193.67 ± 19.82 min in Group C and 109.33 ± 18.56 min Group S (P < 0.001). The duration of analgesia was 299.00 ± 43.38 min in Group C and 152.50 ± 21.04 min in Group S (P < 0.001). Haemodynamics and sedation scores were comparable between two groups.CONCLUSION:Administration of clonidine epidurally, 10 min before SAB, caused early onset and prolonged duration of motor blockade and analgesia, without any significant post-operative complication.
INTRODUCTION:Various adjuvants like morphine, buprenorphine and fentanyl, clonidine, ketamine are being used in anaesthetic practice since long for improvement of peri-operative analgesia following spinal anaesthesia. Such adjuvants have been helpful in induction of early ambulation but at the cost of their associated adverse effects. Therefore search for an effective adjuvant is still going on. Currently Dexmedetomidine, a highly selective α2-adrenoreceptor agonist is being studied for its adjuvant action in spinal anaesthesia.AIM:The present study aims to evaluate the efficacy of intrathecal Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to Bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia in patients undergoing infra-umbilical surgeries.MATERIALS AND METHODS:It was a prospective, double blind study among 60 patients undergoing infraumbilical surgeries under spinalanaesthesia. The patients were randomly allocated to 2 groups (Group I and Group II) of 30 each. Group I received hyperbaric bupivacaine (15 mg) alone and Group II received hyperbaric bupivacaine (15 mg) with Dexmedetomidine (5mcg). The onset time of sensory and motor block, regression time of sensory and motor block, duration of analgesia, haemodynamic parameters were recorded both intra and postoperatively. The primary efficacy parameters were to determine the onset and duration of sensory block, motor block and duration of postoperative analgesia. Secondarily any associated haemodynamic changes and adverse effects of Dexmedetomidine were also recorded.STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:Continuous data were analysed using the Student's t-test and categorical variables by two-tailed Fisher-exact test or Chi-square test.RESULTS:Onset of sensory block was 129.33±14.8 seconds in Group II as compared to 208.33±19.18 seconds in Group I with total duration of sensory block as 317.70±16.16 minutes in Group II and 188±11.86 minutes in Group I. Similarly, onset of motor block was 226.33±31.86 minutes and 320.33±29.81 minutes, with total duration of motor block as 286.33±15.15 minutes and 166.5±12.11 minutes in Group II and in Group I respectively. Duration of analgesia was 333.6±20.67 minutes with Dexmedetomidine but 193.67±7.06 minutes in bupivacaine alone group.CONCLUSION:Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant had shown early onset of sensory and motor block with longer duration of analgesia and haemodynamic stability in the present study as compared to bupivacaine alone.