26
views
1
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    2
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparison of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl as local anesthetic adjuvants in spinal anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          To compare the effects of dexmedetomidine (Dex) and fentanyl as adjuvants to local anesthetics in spinal anesthesia.

          Methods

          Two researchers independently searched the PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and CBM for randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of Dex and fentanyl as adjuvants to local anesthetics for intrathecal injection.

          Results

          A total of 639 patients from nine studies were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that Dex resulted in statistically significant longer duration of stable sensory block (mean difference [MD] =27.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] [9.89, 44.34], P<0.01, I 2=97%), sensory block (standardized mean difference [SMD] =3.81; 95% CI [2.35, 5.27], P<0.01, I 2=97%), motor block (SMD =3.64; 95% CI [2.19, 5.08], P<0.01, I 2=97%), and pain free period (SMD =2.98; 95% CI [1.69, 4.27], P<0.01, I 2=96%); reducing the incidence of pruritus (relative risk [RR] =0.15; 95% CI [0.06, 0.39], P<0.01, I 2=0%) compared with fentanyl. However, the onset of sensory and motor block, the time to peak sensory level, and the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia, and the side effects (nausea, vomiting, shivering and respiratory depression) were not significantly different between Dex and fentanyl.

          Conclusion

          Compared to fentanyl, Dex as local anesthetics adjuvant in spinal anesthesia prolonged the duration of spinal anesthesia, improved postoperative analgesia, reduced the incidence of pruritus, and did not increase the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effect of low-dose dexmedetomidine or clonidine on the characteristics of bupivacaine spinal block.

          The purpose of this study was to compare the onset and duration of sensory and motor block, as well as the hemodynamic changes and level of sedation, following intrathecal bupivacaine supplemented with either dexmedetomidine or clonidine. In a prospective, double-blind study, 60 patients undergoing transurethral resection of prostate or bladder tumor under spinal anesthesia were randomly allocated to one of three groups. Group B received 12 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine, group D received 12 mg of bupivacaine supplemented with 3 microg of dexmedetomidine and group C received 12 mg of bupivacaine supplemented with 30 microg of clonidine. The onset times to reach peak sensory and motor levels, and the sensory and motor regression times, were recorded. Hemodynamic changes and the level of sedation were also recorded. Patients in groups D and C had a significantly shorter onset time of motor block and significantly longer sensory and motor regression times than patients in group B. The mean time of sensory regression to the S1 segment was 303 +/- 75 min in group D, 272 +/- 38 min in group C and 190 +/- 48 min in group B (B vs. D and B vs. C, P < 0.001). The regression of motor block to Bromage 0 was 250 +/- 76 min in group D, 216 +/- 35 min in group C and 163 +/- 47 min in group B (B vs. D and B vs. C, P < 0.001). The onset and regression times were not significantly different between groups D and C. The mean arterial pressure, heart rate and level of sedation were similar in the three groups intra-operatively and post-operatively. Dexmedetomidine (3 microg) or clonidine (30 microg), when added to intrathecal bupivacaine, produces a similar prolongation in the duration of the motor and sensory block with preserved hemodynamic stability and lack of sedation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Facilitatory effects of perineural dexmedetomidine on neuraxial and peripheral nerve block: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

            Nerve blocks improve postoperative analgesia, but their benefits may be short-lived. This quantitative review examines whether perineural dexmedetomidine as a local anaesthetic (LA) adjuvant for neuraxial and peripheral nerve blocks can prolong the duration of analgesia compared with LA alone. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of dexmedetomidine as an LA adjuvant to LA alone on neuraxial and peripheral nerve blocks were reviewed. Sensory block duration, motor block duration, block onset times, analgesic consumption, time to first analgesic request, and side-effects were analysed. were combined using random-effects modelling. A total of 516 patients were analysed from nine RCTs. Five trials investigated dexmedetomidine as part of spinal anaesthesia and four as part of a brachial plexus (BP) block. Sensory block duration was prolonged by 150 min [95% confidence interval (CI): 96, 205, P<0.00001] with intrathecal dexmedetomidine. Perineural dexmedetomidine used in BP block may prolong the mean duration of sensory block by 284 min (95% CI: 1, 566, P=0.05), but this difference did not reach statistical significance. Motor block duration and time to first analgesic request were prolonged for both intrathecal and BP block. Dexmedetomidine produced reversible bradycardia in 7% of BP block patients, but no effect on the incidence of hypotension. No patients experienced respiratory depression. Dexmedetomidine is a potential LA adjuvant that can exhibit a facilitatory effect when administered intrathecally as part of spinal anaesthesia or peripherally as part of a BP block. However, there are presently insufficient safety data to support perineural dexmedetomidine use in the clinical setting.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effect of dexmedetomidine added to spinal bupivacaine for urological procedures.

              To determine the effect of adding dexmedetomidine to bupivacaine for neuraxial anesthesia. Sixty-six patients were studied between April and May 2008 in the University of Jordan, Amman Jordan. They were randomly assigned into 3 groups, each receiving spinal bupivacaine 12.5mg combined with normal saline (group N) Dexmedetomidine 5 microg (group D5), or dexmedetomidine 10 microg (group D10). The onset times to reach T10 sensory and Bromage 3 motor block, and the regression times to reach S1 sensory level and Bromage 0 motor scale, were recorded. The mean time of sensory block to reach the T10 dermatome was 4.7 +/- 2.0 minutes in D10 group, 6.3 +/- 2.7 minutes in D5, and 9.5 +/- 3.0 minutes in group N. The mean time to reach Bromage 3 scale was 10.4 +/- 3.4 minutes in group D10, 13.0+/-3.4 minutes in D5, and 18.0 +/- 3.3 minutes in group N. The regression time to reach S1 dermatome was 338.9 +/- 44.8 minutes in group D10, 277.1 +/- 23.2 minutes in D5, and 165.5 +/- 32.9 minutes in group N. The regression to Bromage 0 was 302.9 +/- 36.7 minutes in D10, 246.4 +/- 25.7 minutes in D5, and 140.1 +/- 32.3 minutes in group N. Onset and regression of sensory and motor block were highly significant (N vesus D5, N versus D10, and D5 versus D10, p<0.001). Dexmedetomidine has a dose dependant effect on the onset and regression of sensory and motor block when used as an adjuvant to bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Drug Des Devel Ther
                Drug Des Devel Ther
                Drug Design, Development and Therapy
                Drug Design, Development and Therapy
                Dove Medical Press
                1177-8881
                2017
                01 December 2017
                : 11
                : 3413-3424
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Anesthesiology, First Affiliated Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning
                [2 ]College of Life and Health Sciences, Northeastern University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Jun Wang, First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, 155 Nanjing Street, Heping District, Shenyang, Liaoning Province, China, Tel +86 158 4037 7700, Email wangjuncmu@ 123456hotmail.com
                Article
                dddt-11-3413
                10.2147/DDDT.S146092
                5716323
                © 2017 Sun et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Categories
                Review

                Comments

                Comment on this article