CONSORT the effect of a bolus dose of dexmedetomidine on postoperative pain, agitation, and quality of recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: The perioperative administration of dexmedetomidine may improve the quality of recovery (QoR) after major abdominal and spinal surgeries. We evaluated the effect of an intraoperative bolus of dexmedetomidine on postoperative pain, emergence agitation, and the QoR after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to receive dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg 5 minutes after anesthesia induction (dexmedetomidine group, n = 45) or normal saline (control group, n = 45). The primary outcome was the QoR at the first postoperative day using a 40-item scoring system (QoR-40). Secondary outcomes included intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, postoperative agitation, pain, and nausea and vomiting. RESULTS: The heart rate and the mean blood pressure were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the control group (P < .001 and .007, respectively). During extubation, emergence agitation was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the control group (23% vs 64%, P < .001). The median pain scores in the post-anesthetic care unit were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the control group (4 [2-7] vs 5 [4-7], P = .034). The incidence of postoperative agitation, pain, and nausea and vomiting was not different between the groups. On the first postoperative day, recovery profile was similar between the groups. However, the scores on the emotional state and physical comfort dimensions were significantly higher in the dexmedetomidine group than in the control group (P = .038 and .040, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A bolus dose of dexmedetomidine after anesthesia induction may improve intraoperative hemodynamics, emergence agitation, and immediate postoperative analgesia. However, it does not affect overall QoR-40 score after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Effect of dexmedetomidine on perioperative hemodynamics and organ protection in children with congenital heart disease: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the effects of dexmedetomidine (Dex) on hemodynamics and organ protection in congenital heart disease (CHD) children who underwent open-heart surgery under cryogenic cardiopulmonary bypass. METHODS: Ninety children were randomly allocated to group C (0.9% saline 0.2 µg/kg/hour), group D1 (Dex 0.2 µg/kg/hour), and group D2 (Dex 0.4 µg/kg/hour) (n = 30 per group). All participants received fentanyl, propofol and 1% sevoflurane for anesthesia induction. Hemodynamic data were measured from T0 (before the induction) to T7 (30 minutes after extubation). The difference of arterial internal jugular vein bulbar oxygen difference and cerebral oxygen extraction ratio were calculated according to Fick formula. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was performed to detect the serum myocardial, brain and kidney injury markers. The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) was calculated by serum creatinine level. Tracheal extubation time, postoperative pain score and emergence agitation score were also recorded. RESULTS: Compared with group C, group D1, and D2 exhibited reduction in hemodynamic parameters, myocardial and brain injury indicators, and tracheal extubation time. There were no significant differences in blood urea nitrogen and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin or incidence of AKI among the 3 groups. Besides, the incidence of tachycardia, nausea, vomiting and moderate agitation, and the FLACC scale in group D1 and D2 were lower than those in group C. Moreover, Dex 0.4 g/kg/hour could further reduce the dosage of fentanyl and dopamine compared with Dex 0.2 g/kg/hour. CONCLUSIONS: Dex anesthesia can effectively maintain hemodynamic stability and diminish organ injuries in CHD children.

A study comparing the effect of premedication with intravenous midazolam or dexmedetomidine on ketamine-fentanyl sedoanalgesia in burn patients: A randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Dressing changes and wound care-debridement procedures often cause fear and anxiety in burn patients, as these processes are quite painful. In order to determine the best method for alleviating pain during these procedures, the current study compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous dexmedetomidine and midazolam for premedication prior to these painful burn care procedures. METHODS: This comparative and randomized study included patients who had a burn size of 1563%, were aged 1870 years, were diagnosed with the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA I-II), and who underwent painful burn care procedures. Patients were intravenously administered either 1 mcg/kg dexmedetomidine (Group 1) or 0.03 mg/kg midazolam (Group 2) prior to the burn care procedure. Recorded at predetermined time points for each patient were heart rhythm (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), standard bispectral index (BIS), and Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS). RESULTS: In the dexmedetomidine group, HR and MAP measurements of patients ​​at the 3rd, 5th, and 10th mins during sedation were significantly lower than the baseline values (p < 0.05). A significant decrease in SpO2 was observed in both groups at the 10th min during sedation, but the decline was higher in the midazolam group (p < 0.05). BIS measurements of the patients in both groups were significantly lower at 10 min. during sedation and at 15th and 60th mins during the procedure (p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the group (p > 0.05). The RSS scales of both groups in during the sedation were higher in the 3rd, 5th and 10th mins than the baseline values (p < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). The RSS scales of groups in during the burn procedure were significantly higher at 15 th min than the 0 th values, while the RSS scales of both groups were significantly lower in the 45th and 60th mins (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Results of this study indicate that dexmedetomidine causes hemodynamic alterations while midazolam causes respiratory depression. However, these effects are not severe, and we conclude that both agents are safe and effective to ensure sedation prior to painful burn-care procedures.

The effect of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil on the postoperative sore throat after thyroidectomy.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative sore throat (POST) is an important concern in surgical patients undergoing endotracheal intubation. Its prevalence after thyroidectomy is up to 80%. The current study aimed to assess the effect of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil on postoperative sore throat. METHODS: Seventy-four patients who underwent thyroidectomy were randomized to receive either dexmedetomidine (group D) or remifentanil (group R). At anesthesia induction, group D received dexmedetomidine 1 µg/kg over 10 minutes, followed by continuous dexmedetomidine infusion at 0.3 to 0.6 µg/kg/hour during surgery. Group R received remifentanil of 3 to 4 ng/ml during induction, followed by 1.5 to 2.5 ng/ml remifentanil infusion during surgery. POST at rest and swallowing was assessed during the first 24 hours in serial time periods (0-1, 1-6, and 6-24 hours). Hoarseness and postoperative pain score were also assessed. RESULTS: POST incidence at rest (0-1, 1-6, and 6-24 hours) and swallowing (1-6 and 6-24 hours) was lower in group D than in group R. POST severity was significantly lower in group D than in group R during each time period. The incidence of postoperative hoarseness was also lower in group D than in group R at 1 to 6 and 6 to 24 hours. The postoperative pain score was lower in group D than in group R during each time period. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion reduced the incidence and severity of POST for 24 hours after thyroidectomy.

The effect of dexmedetomidine and clonidine on the inflammatory response in critical illness: a systematic review of animal and human studies.

BACKGROUND: The α2 agonists, dexmedetomidine and clonidine, are used as sedative drugs during critical illness. These drugs may have anti-inflammatory effects, which might be relevant to critical illness, but a systematic review of published literature has not been published. We reviewed animal and human studies relevant to critical illness to summarise the evidence for an anti-inflammatory effect from α2 agonists. METHODS: We searched PubMed, the Cochrane library, and Medline. Animal and human studies published in English were included. Broad search terms were used: dexmedetomidine or clonidine, sepsis, and inflammation. Reference lists were screened for additional publications. Titles and abstracts were screened independently by two reviewers and full-text articles obtained for potentially eligible studies. Data extraction used a bespoke template given study diversity, and quality assessment was qualitative. RESULTS: Study diversity meant meta-analysis was not feasible so descriptive synthesis was undertaken. We identified 30 animal studies (caecal ligation/puncture (9), lipopolysaccharide (14), acute lung injury (5), and ischaemia-reperfusion syndrome (5)), and 9 human studies. Most animal (26 dexmedetomidine, 4 clonidine) and all human studies used dexmedetomidine. In animal studies, α2 agonists reduced serum and/or tissue TNFα (20 studies), IL-6 (17 studies), IL-1ß (7 studies), NFκB (6 studies), TLR4 (6 studies), and a range of other mediators. Timing and doses varied widely, but in many cases were not directly relevant to human sedation use. In human studies, dexmedetomidine reduced CRP (4 studies), TNFα (5 studies), IL-6 (6 studies), IL-1ß (3 studies), and altered several other mediators. Most studies were small and low quality. No studies related effects to clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Evidence supports potential anti-inflammatory effects from α2 agonists, but the relevance to clinically important outcomes is uncertain. Further work should explore whether dose relationships with inflammation and clinical outcomes are present which might be separate from sedation-mediated effects.

Determination of blood dexmedetomidine in dried blood spots by LC-MS/MS to screen therapeutic levels in paediatric patients.

Dexmedetomidine is an imidazole derivative, with high affinity for α2 adrenergic receptors, used for sedation, analgesia and adjuvant anaesthesia. In this study, an analytical method for the quantification of dexmedetomidine in dried blood spots was developed, validated and applied. The drug was extracted from dried blood spot by liquid extraction; the separation was carried out by ultra high-resolution liquid chromatography in reverse phase coupled to tandem mass spectrometry method. An X Select cyano 5 µm HSS column (2.1 X 150 mm, Waters) and a mobile phase composed of 0.1% formic acid: acetonitrile [50:50 v/v], were used. The test was linear over the concentration range of 50 to 2000 pg/mL. The coefficients of variation for the intra and interday trials were less than 15%. The drug was stable under the conditions tested. The method was successfully applied for the quantification of 6 patients, aged 0 to 2 years, with classification ASA I, who underwent ambulatory surgeries, receiving a dose of 1 µg/Kg dexmedetomidine IV. The drug concentrations in the different sampling times were in the range of 76 to 868 pg/mL.