Effect of Dexmedetomidine Addition in Erector Spinae Plane Block on Opioid Consumption after Lumbar Spine Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of adding 0.5 micrograms/kg of dexmedetomidine to 0.2% ropivacaine in erector spinae plane block in terms of 24-hour opioid consumption after lumbar spine surgeries. STUDY DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial. Place and Duration of the Study: The Security Forces Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from 30th November 2022 to 30th March 2023. METHODOLOGY: Patients aged between 18-70 years, ASA 1-3 who were booked to undergo lumbar spine surgeries under general anaesthesia were inducted. Patients in the intervention group received erector spinae plane block (ESPB). Exclusion criteria were patient refusal, inability to give consent, patients with contraindications to regional anaesthesia, known allergy to study medications, inability to use patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), psychiatric disorders or patients using any psychiatric medications. The primary outcome measure of the study was 24-hour opioid consumption. RESULTS: The numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores were significantly decreased in the ESPB-D group at 30 minutes (p = 0.042), at 1 hour (p = 0.018), at 2 hours (p = 0.044), at 12 hours (p = 0.039), at 18 hours (p = 0.011), and at 24 hours (p = 0.020). Intraoperative use of remifentanil was also significantly lower in the ESPB-D group (p <0.01). ESPB using dexmedetomidine also reduced opioid consumption over a period of 24 hours (p <0.01). Median patient satisfaction score and median ease of mobility were also significantly better in the ESPB-D group. CONCLUSION: Addition of dexmedetomidine in erector spinae plane block reduced pain scores and intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption after lumbar spine surgery. KEY WORDS: Dexmedetomidine, Erector spinae plane block, Lumbar spine surgery, Opioid consumption, Pain control.

Dexmedetomidine Attenuates Inflammation in Elderly Patients Following Major Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Dexmedetomidine (Dex) may have anti-inflammatory properties and potentially reduce the incidence of postoperative organ injury. Objective: To investigate whether Dex protects pulmonary and renal function via its anti-inflammatory effects in elderly patients undergoing prolonged major hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery. Design and Setting: Between October 2019 and December 2020, this randomized controlled trial was carried out at a tertiary hospital in Chongqing, China. Patients: 86 patients aged 60-75 who underwent long-duration (> 4 hrs) hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery without significant comorbidities were enrolled and randomly assigned into two groups at a 1:1 ratio. Interventions: Patients were given either Dex or an equivalent volume of 0.9% saline (Placebo) with a loading dose of 1 µg kg-1 for 10 min, followed by 0.5 µg kg-1 hr-1 for maintenance until the end of surgery. Main Outcome Measures: The changes in serum concentrations of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) were primary outcomes. Results: At one hour postoperatively, serum IL-6 displayed a nine-fold increase (P<0.05) in the Placebo group. Administration of Dex decreased IL-6 to 278.09 ± 45.43 pg/mL (95% CI: 187.75 to 368.43) compared to the Placebo group (P=0.019; 432.16 ± 45.43 pg/mL, 95% CI: 341.82 to 522.50). However, no significant differences in TNF-α were observed between the two groups. The incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury was twice as high in the Placebo group (9.30%) compared to the Dex group (4.65%), and the incidence of postoperative acute lung injury was 23.26% in the Dex group, lower than that in the Placebo group (30.23%), although there was no statistical significance between the two groups. Conclusion: Dex administration in elderly patients undergoing major hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery reduces inflammation and potentially protects kidneys and lungs. Registration: Chinese Clinical Trials Registry, identifier: ChiCTR1900024162, on 28 June 2019.

Dexmedetomidine's Effects on the Livers and Kidneys of Rats with Pancreatic Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury.

Objective: Pancreatic surgeries inherently cause ischemia-reperfusion (IR) injury, affecting not only the pancreas but also distant organs. This study was conducted to explore the potential use of dexmedetomidine, a sedative with antiapoptotic, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidant properties, in mitigating the impacts of pancreatic IR on kidney and liver tissues. Methods: A total of 24 rats were randomly divided into four groups: control (C), dexmedetomidine (D), ischemia reperfusion (IR), and dexmedetomidine ischemia reperfusion (D-IR). Pancreatic ischemia was induced in the IR and D-IR groups. Dexmedetomidine was administered intraperitoneally to the D and D-IR groups. Liver and kidney tissue samples were subjected to microscopic examinations after hematoxylin and eosin staining. The levels of thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), aryllesterase (AES), catalase (CAT), and glutathione S-transferase (GST) enzyme activity were assessed in liver and kidney tissues. The serum levels of aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and creatinine were measured. Results: A comparison of the groups revealed that the IR group exhibited significantly elevated TBARS (p < 0.0001), AES (p = 0.004), and CAT enzyme activity (p < 0.0001) levels in the liver and kidney compared to groups C and D. Group D-IR demonstrated notably reduced histopathological damage (p < 0.05) and low TBARS (p < 0.0001), AES (p = 0.004), and CAT enzyme activity (p < 0.0001) in the liver and kidney as well as low AST and ALT activity levels (p < 0.0001) in the serum compared to the IR group. Conclusion: The preemptive administration of dexmedetomidine before pancreatic IR provides significant protection to kidney and liver tissues, as evidenced by the histopathological and biochemical parameters in this study. The findings underscored the potential therapeutic role of dexmedetomidine in mitigating the multiorgan damage associated with pancreatic surgeries.

Effect of Oxycodone-Based Multimodal Analgesia on Visceral Pain After Major Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Randomised, Double-Blind, Controlled Trial.

Purpose: Oxycodone is a potent µ- and κ-opioid receptor agonist that can relieve both somatic and visceral pain. We assessed oxycodone- vs sufentanil-based multimodal analgesia on postoperative pain following major laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery. Methods: In this randomised double-blind controlled trial, 40 adult patients were randomised (1:1, stratified by type of surgery) to receive oxycodone- or sufentanil-based multimodal analgesia, comprising bilateral transverse abdominis plane blocks, intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion, flurbiprofen axetil, and oxycodone- or sufentanil-based patient-controlled analgesia. The co-primary outcomes were time-weighted average (TWA) of visceral pain (defined as intra-abdominal deep and dull pain) at rest and on coughing during 0-24 h postoperatively, assessed using the numerical rating scale (0-10) with a minimal clinically important difference of 1. Results: All patients completed the study (median age, 64 years; 65% male) and had adequate postoperative pain control. The mean (SD) 24-h TWA of visceral pain at rest was 1.40 (0.77) in the oxycodone group vs 2.00 (0.98) in the sufentanil group (mean difference=-0.60, 95% CI, -1.16 to -0.03; P=0.039). Patients in the oxycodone group had a significantly lower 24-h TWA of visceral pain on coughing (2.00 [0.83] vs 2.98 [1.26]; mean difference=-0.98, 95% CI, -1.66 to -0.30; P=0.006). In the subgroup analyses, the treatment effect of oxycodone vs sufentanil on the co-primary outcomes did not differ in terms of age (18-65 years or >65 years), sex (female or male), or type of surgery (colorectal or gastric). Secondary outcomes (24-h TWA of incisional and shoulder pain, postoperative analgesic usage, rescue analgesia, adverse events, and patient satisfaction) were comparable between groups. Conclusion: For patients undergoing major laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery, oxycodone-based multimodal analgesia reduced postoperative visceral pain in a statistically significant but not clinically important manner. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100052085).

The EC50 of propofol with different doses of dexmedetomidine during gastrointestinal endoscopy: A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the dose-response relationship between dexmedetomidine and propofol in sedating patients and to determine the optimal dosage of dexmedetomidine during gastrointestinal endoscopy. METHODS: One hundred fifty patients were divided into 5 groups, each receiving a loading dose of dexmedetomidine (0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0 µg/kg) or saline, with propofol for sedation. The median effective concentration (EC50) of propofol was calculated using the modified Dixon up-and-down approach. Adverse effects, vital signs, procedure, and recovery times were recorded. RESULTS: The EC50 of propofol in groups NS, D0.4, D0.6, D0.8, and D1.0 were 3.02, 2.44, 1.97, 1.85, and 1.83 µg/mL, respectively. Heart rate in the dexmedetomidine groups decreased more than the NS group (P < .001). The mean arterial pressure (MAP) in the NS group experienced a decline compared to groups D0.8 and D1.0 when the plasma concentration and effect-site concentration reached equilibrium. Additionally, the respiratory rate was found to be lower in groups NS, D0.4, D0.6, and D0.8 (P < .05). Recovery time in groups D0.8 and D1.0 was longer than the NS group (P < .05). Bruggemann comfort scales score was higher in group D1.0 (P < .05). No significant difference was found in the incidences of hypotension and bradycardia, and the dose of ephedrine and atropine. Respiratory depression was significantly reduced in groups D0.8 and D1.0 compared to the NS group. CONCLUSION: A single dose of 0.6 to 0.8 µg/kg of dexmedetomidine should be recommended in combination with propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy. And the EC50 of propofol is 1.97 to 1.85 µg/mL.

Perioperative analgesic effects of the erector spinae plane block with bupivacaine or bupivacaine-dexmedetomidine in dogs undergoing hemilaminectomy: A randomized controlled trial.

Objective: To compare the perioperative opioid requirements among dogs receiving an erector spinae plane (ESP) block with bupivacaine, with or without dexmedetomidine, and a control group. Animals and procedure: Thirty client-owned, healthy adult dogs undergoing hemilaminectomy were included in this randomized, prospective, blinded clinical study. Dogs were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: Group B, ESP block with bupivacaine; Group BD, ESP block with bupivacaine and dexmedetomidine; and Group C, control. Rescue intra- and postoperative analgesia consisted of fentanyl and methadone, respectively. Postoperative pain was evaluated using the short form of the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale (CMPS-SF). Results: In Group BD, 0/10 dogs required intraoperative fentanyl, compared to 9/10 in Group C (P < 0.001), whereas 1/10 required postoperative methadone, compared to 9/10 in Group B (P = 0.003) and 10/10 in Group C (P < 0.001). The total amount of intraoperative fentanyl (µg/kg) was 0 (0 to 4) in Group B and 0 (0 to 0) in BD, compared to 6 (0 to 8) in C (P = 0.004 and P < 0.001, respectively). Postoperative methadone (mg/kg) required during the first 12 h was 0.5 (0 to 1.4) in Group B (P = 0.003) and 0 (0 to 0) in BD (P < 0.001), compared to C (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusion: An ESP block with bupivacaine, with or without dexmedetomidine, was associated with a reduction in perioperative opioid consumption and provided effective acute pain control.

Effets analgésiques périopératoires du bloc des érecteurs du rachis avec de la bupivacaïne ou de la bupivacaïne-dexmédétomidine chez les chiens subissant une hémilaminectomie: un essai contrôlé randomisé. Objectif: Comparer les besoins périopératoires en opioïdes chez les chiens recevant un bloc des érecteurs de la colonne vertébrale (ESP) avec de la bupivacaïne, avec ou sans dexmédétomidine, et un groupe témoin. Animaux et procédure: Trente chiens adultes en bonne santé appartenant à des clients subissant une hémilaminectomie ont été inclus dans cette étude clinique randomisée, prospective et en aveugle. Les chiens ont été répartis au hasard dans 1 des 3 groupes de traitement: groupe B, bloc ESP avec bupivacaïne; groupe BD, bloc ESP avec bupivacaïne et dexmédétomidine; et groupe C, témoin. L'analgésie de secours peropératoire et postopératoire consistait respectivement en fentanyl et en méthadone. La douleur postopératoire a été évaluée à l'aide du formulaire abrégé de l'échelle de mesure de la douleur de Glasgow (CMPS-SF). Résultats: Dans le groupe BD, 0/10 chiens ont eu besoin de fentanyl peropératoire, contre 9/10 dans le groupe C (P < 0,001), tandis que 1/10 ont eu besoin de méthadone postopératoire, contre 9/10 dans le groupe B (P = 0,003) et 10/10 dans le groupe C (P < 0,001). La quantité totale de fentanyl peropératoire (µg/kg) était de 0 (0 à 4) dans le groupe B et de 0 (0 à 0) dans le groupe BD, contre 6 (0 à 8) dans le groupe C (P = 0,004 et P < 0,001, respectivement). La méthadone postopératoire (mg/kg) nécessaire au cours des 12 premières heures était de 0,5 (0 à 1,4) dans le groupe B (P = 0,003) et de 0 (0 à 0) dans le groupe BD (P < 0,001), par rapport au groupe C (P = 0,003). et P < 0,001, respectivement). Conclusion: Un bloc ESP avec de la bupivacaïne, avec ou sans dexmédétomidine, a été associé à une réduction de la consommation peropératoire d'opioïdes et a permis un contrôle efficace de la douleur aiguë.(Traduit par Dr Serge Messier).

Use of orally administered dexmedetomidine to induce emesis in cats.

CASE SERIES SUMMARY: This case series describes the use of orally administered dexmedetomidine at a dose of 20 µg/kg to induce emesis in six cats. Emesis was successfully induced in 5/6 cats, with each of the cats vomiting once. The reasons for inducing vomiting included known or suspected ingestion of lilies, onions, acetaminophen (paracetamol) or acetylsalicylic acid. Four of the five cats in which emesis induction was successful did not develop any clinical signs of toxicity associated with the toxin ingested; the fifth cat developed clinicopathological changes consistent with acetaminophen toxicity. All six cats exhibited moderate to profound sedation, as expected, but no other adverse effects were documented. RELEVANCE AND NOVEL INFORMATION: Induction of emesis in cats is notoriously difficult. This case series describes a novel route of administration of dexmedetomidine, a commonly available medication, with a high success rate observed for inducing emesis in this group of cats.

Cats are notoriously more difficult to elicit vomiting in than dogs. This case series describes the use of a novel way of giving cats a commonly available veterinary medication to cause vomiting. The medication, dexmedetomidine, was given by mouth to six cats, of which five vomited. All six cats had eaten toxins: lilies, acetaminophen (paracetamol), aspirin or onions. Four of the five cats that vomited did not develop any signs of toxicity. All six cats that received the medication became sedated, but no other side effects were noted.

Effect of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine Before Extubation on Emergence Delirium after Nasal Surgeries.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of single dose of dexmedetomidine (0.5 mcg/kg) in reducing the incidence and severity of postoperative emergence delirium (EmD). STUDY DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial. Place and Duration of the Study: Department of Anaesthesia, Security Forces Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from 1st December 2022 to 30th March 2023. METHODOLOGY: Patients, aged between 18-65 years, with ASA 1-3 scheduled to undergo nasal surgeries under general anaesthesia, were inducted in the study. Exclusion criteria were patient refusal, later request for removal from the study, inability to give consent, known allergy to dexmedetomidine, body mass index (BMI) more than 35, history of obstructive sleep apnoea, history of psychiatric illness, pregnancy, and presence of liver and renal diseases. The primary outcome measure of the study was the incidence of emergence delirium in the postoperative period. RESULTS: The frequency of EmD after nasal surgery was 52.38% in the control group compared to 14.28% in the dexmedetomidine group (p = 0.01). Pain scores were not statistically different between the two groups. The duration of post anaesthesia care unit (PACU) stay was significantly lesser in dexmedetomidine group (p <0.001). The satisfaction score on the visual analogue scale (VAS) was also found to be higher in patients who received intravenous dexmedetomidine (p <0.001). CONCLUSION: The use of single dose dexmedetomidine before extubation in nasal surgeries reduces the EmD and improves patient satisfaction. KEY WORDS: Dexmedetomidine, Emergence delirium, Nasal surgery, Opioid consumption, Pain control.

Intrathecal Dexamethasone and Dexmedetomidine as Adjuncts to Bupivacaine in Elective Cesarean Section: A Case Series.

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the combination of intrathecal dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine in combination with bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia is effective for reducing nausea, vomiting, shivering, and pain. A retrospective review of records was used to examine the outcomes of patients undergoing cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia with dexamethasone, dexmedetomidine, and bupivacaine. The records of 11 consecutive patients who underwent cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine in combination with bupivacaine were evaluated. Data collected included patient demographics, medications and fluids administered, presence of nausea, vomiting, shivering, intraoperative breakthrough pain, and postoperative pain. There were no reported complications related to the administration of intrathecal dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine in combination with bupivacaine in this case series of patients. No patients required treatment for intraoperative vomiting, shivering, or breakthrough pain. One patient required opioid pain medication postoperatively. This case series demonstrates that the administration of intrathecal dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine in combination with bupivacaine for patients undergoing elective cesarean section appears to be safe and offers some advantages as to traditional methods of intrathecal delivery for this surgical procedure.

Impact of intraoperative dexmedetomidine on postoperative delirium and pro-inflammatory cytokine levels in elderly patients undergoing thoracolumbar compression fracture surgery: A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the efficacy of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in reducing postoperative delirium (POD) and modulating pro-inflammatory cytokines in elderly patients undergoing thoracolumbar compression fracture surgery. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from October 2022 to January 2023 at Anting Hospital in Shanghai, 218 elderly patients were randomized into DEX (n = 110) and normal saline (NS, n = 108) groups. The DEX group received 0.5 µg/kg/h DEX, and delirium incidence was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) on days 1 to 3 post-surgery. Levels of interleukins IL-1ß, IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) were measured pre-operation (T0) and on postoperative days 1 (T1) and 3 (T3). Preoperative (T0) and postoperative day 1 (T1) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples were treated with varying concentrations of olanzapine or DEX to observe their regulatory effects on the expression of Phospho-ERK1/2 and Phospho-JNK. RESULTS: Dexmedetomidine significantly lowered the incidence of POD to 18.2%, compared to 30.6% in the NS group (P = .033). While all patients showed an initial increase in cytokine levels after surgery, by T3, IL-6 and TNF-α levels notably decreased in the DEX group, with no significant change in IL-1ß levels across groups. The adverse events rate was similar between groups, demonstrating the safety of DEX in this population. In postoperative CSF samples, treatment with 0.5 mM DEX significantly downregulated Phospho-JNK and upregulated Phospho-ERK1/2 expression, demonstrating a dose-dependent modulation of inflammatory responses. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine is effective in reducing early POD in elderly patients post-thoracolumbar compression fracture surgery. It also decreases IL-6 and TNF-α levels, indicating its potential in managing postoperative inflammatory responses. Treatment with 0.5 mM DEX significantly modulated Phospho-ERK1/2 and Phospho-JNK expressions in postoperative CSF samples, indicating a dose-dependent effect on reducing inflammation. This study contributes to understanding DEX's role in improving postoperative outcomes in elderly patients.

Application of intranasal dexmedetomidine in magnetic resonance imaging of preterm infants: The ED50, efficacy and safety analysis.

BACKGROUND: Infants undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) often require pharmacological sedation. Dexmedetomidine serves as a novel sedative agent that induces a unique unconsciousness similar to natural sleep, and therefore has currently been used as the first choice for sedation in infants and young children. OBJECTIVE: To determine the 50% effective dose (ED50) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) of intranasal dexmedetomidine for MRI in preterm and term infants, and to observe the incidence of adverse events. To explore whether there were differences in ED50 and 95%CI, heart rate (HR) and blood oxygen saturation (SpO2), the induction time and wake-up time and the incidence of adverse events between the 2 groups, so as to provide guidance for clinical safe medication for the meanwhile. METHODS: A total of 68 infants were prospectively recruited for MRI examination under drug sedation (1 week ≤ age ≤ 23 weeks or weight ≤ 5kg). The children were divided into 2 groups according to whether they had preterm birth experience (Preterm group, Atterm group). The Dixon up-and-down method was used to explore ED50. The basic vital signs of the 2 groups were recorded, and the heart rate and SpO2 were recorded every 5 minutes until the infants were discharged from the hospital. The induction time, wake-up time and adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: The ED50 (95%CI) of intranasal dexmedetomidine in the Preterm group and the Atterm group were 2.23 (2.03-2.66) µg/kg and 2.64 (2.49-2.83) µg/kg, respectively (P < .05). the wake-up time was longer in Preterm group (98.00min) than in Atterm group (81.00 min) (P < .05), the incidence of bradycardia in Preterm group was 3/33, which was higher than that in Atterm group (1/35). There was no difference in the induction time between the 2 groups (P > .05), and there was no significant difference in other adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal dexmedetomidine can be safely used for sedation in preterm infants undergoing MRI. Compared with term infants, preterm infants have a lower dose of dexmedetomidine, a higher incidence of bradycardia, and a longer weak-up time.

A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study comparing the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

BACKGROUND: Balanced propofol sedation is extensively used in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), but sedation-related adverse events (SRAEs) are common. In various clinical settings, the combination of dexmedetomidine with opioids and benzodiazepines has provided effective sedation with increased safety. The aim of this investigation was to compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation during ERCP. METHODS: Forty-one patients were randomly divided into two groups: the dexmedetomidine (DEX) group and the propofol (PRO) group. Patients in the DEX group received an additional bolus of 0.6 µg kg-1 dexmedetomidine followed by a dexmedetomidine infusion at 1.2 µg kg-1 h-1, whereas the PRO group received 1-2 mg kg-1 of propofol bolus followed by a propofol infusion at 2-3 mg kg-1 h-1. During ERCP, the primary outcome was the incidence of hypoxemia (SpO2 < 90% for > 10 s). Other intraoperative adverse events were also recorded as secondary outcomes, including respiratory depression (respiratory rate of < 10 bpm min-1), hypotension (MAP < 65 mmHg), and bradycardia (HR < 45 beats min-1). RESULTS: The incidence of hypoxemia was significantly reduced in the DEX group compared to the PRO group (0% versus 28.6%, respectively; P = 0.032). Patients in the PRO group exhibited respiratory depression more frequently than patients in the DEX group (35% versus 81%, respectively; P = 0.003). There were no significant differences in terms of hypotension and bradycardia episodes between groups. During the procedures, the satisfaction scores of endoscopists and patients, as well as the pain and procedure memory scores of patients were comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: In comparison with propofol, dexmedetomidine provided adequate sedation safety with no adverse effects on sedation efficacy during ERCP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2200061468, 25/06/2022.

Preoperative Anxiolytic and Sedative Effects of Intranasal Remimazolam and Dexmedetomidine: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study in Children Undergoing General Surgeries.

Purpose: Remimazolam, an ultra-short-acting and fast-metabolized sedative, has only been sporadically investigated in children. This study was performed to determine the beneficial effects of intranasal remimazolam or dexmedetomidine on preoperative anxiety in children undergoing general surgeries. Patients and Methods: Ninety children were randomly and equally assigned to Group R (intranasal remimazolam 1.5mg kg-1), Group D (intranasal dexmedetomidine 2 mcg kg-1), and Group C (intranasal distilled water). The primary outcomes were the preoperative anxiety scores using the modified Yale preoperative anxiety scale (m-Ypas). The secondary outcomes included the cooperation behaviour of intranasal drug application, preoperative sedation levels, parental separation anxiety scores (PSAS), and mask acceptance scores (MAS). Results: Group R showed a significant low anxiety at 10 min after intranasal premedication (vs group C, P=0.010; vs group D, P = 0.002) and at anaesthesia induction (vs group C, P = 0.004). Group D showed a significantly low anxiety score only prior to anaesthesia induction (vs group C, P = 0.005). Most children in group R achieved mild sedation at 10 min (vs group C, P < 0.001; vs group D, P < 0.001), with a few progressing to deep sedation afterwards, while group D tended toward deep sedation. Compared to Group C, patients in Group R performed significantly better on the MAS (P = 0.014) and PSAS (P = 0.008). However, remimazolam did cause poor cooperation behavior to the intranasal application due to its mucosal irritation (vs group C, P = 0.001; vs group D, P = 0.010). Conclusion: Both intranasal remimazolam and dexmedetomidine can effectively alleviate preoperative anxiety in children. While intranasal remimazolam has a rapid onset, it produces only mild sedation and causes substantial nasal irritation. Trial Registration: NCT04720963, January 22, 2021, ClinicalTrials.Gov.

Effect of Dexmedetomidine Combined with Remifentanil on Emergence Agitation During Awakening from Sevoflurane Anesthesia for Pediatric Liver Surgery.

BACKGROUND We aimed to assess the effect of dexmedetomidine (Dex) combined with remifentanil on emergence agitation (EA) during awakening from sevoflurane anesthesia for pediatric liver surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS Sixty children who underwent liver surgery in our hospital were prospectively selected and randomly allocated into group A (placebo+remifentanil+sevoflurane) or group B (Dex+remifentanil+sevoflurane). Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) at different time points, agitation score during awakening, behavioral status, pain level, and the incidence of postoperative adverse effects were compared in both groups. RESULTS Children in group B had lower HR and MAP levels immediately after tracheal extubation and 5 min after tracheal extubation than those in group A. The Aono's scores, PAED agitation scores, and CHIPP scores at 15 min and 30 min of admission to the PACU were lower in group B than in group A. The incidence of agitation during postoperative anesthesia awakening was lower in group B in contrast to group A. There was no significant difference in postoperative adverse reactions between group A and group B. CONCLUSIONS In pediatric liver surgery, the use of Dex+remifentanil+sevoflurane anesthesia can reduce the incidence of EA during the awakening period, stabilize hemodynamic levels, and relieve postoperative pain, and has fewer postoperative adverse effects, which warrants clinical application.

Dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil in nasal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nasal surgeries, addressing anatomical variations for form and function, require careful anesthesia administration, including dexmedetomidine and remifentanil. This meta-analysis evaluates their safety and efficacy variations in nasal surgeries, emphasizing patient comfort and optimal outcomes. METHODS: Four electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL Complete) were searched for records in English. Studies that measure the effect of dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil on patients underwent nasal surgery were included. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess the quality of the included studies. A random-effect model was preferred and statistical analysis was performed by Stata software version 17. RESULTS: Out of an initial pool of 63 articles, five studies were selected for this analysis. All of these chosen studies were Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). The meta-analysis involved a total of 302 participants, with 152 in the remifentanil group and 150 in the dexmedetomidine group. The analysis aimed to compare the effects of Dexmedetomidine and Remifentanil on heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) during surgery. Both groups exhibited similar MAP and HR, with the exception of a slightly lower HR in the remifentanil group at the 15th minute of surgery (Standardized Mean Difference: -0.24 [-0.83, 0.34]). Furthermore, when evaluating the impact of these medications on post-surgery outcomes, including pain levels, the use of pain relief medications, patient-surgeon satisfaction, agitation scores, and recovery time, no significant differences were observed between the two medications in any of these aspects. CONCLUSION: In summary, the study compared Dexmedetomidine and Remifentanil in nasal surgeries anesthesia. No significant differences were found in heart rate, blood pressure, satisfaction, pain, agitation, or recovery time. The study had limitations, and future research should establish standardized protocols and consider various surgical factors.

The influence of dexmedetomidine added to ropivacaine for transversus abdominis plane block on perioperative neurocognitive disorders after radical colorectal cancer surgery: randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Perioperative Neurocognitive Disorders (PND) is a common neurological complication after radical colorectal cancer surgery, which increases adverse outcomes. So, our objective is to explore the influence of dexmedetomidine added to ropivacaine for transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) on perioperative neurocognitive disorders, and to provide a new way to reduce the incidence of PND. METHODS: One hundred and eighty patients submitted to radical laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery were randomly divided into Control group and Dex group. Ultrasound guided TAPB was performed after anesthesia induction: 0.5% ropivacaine 20 ml was injected into each transversus abdominis plane in Control group, 0.5% ropivacaine + 1 µg/kg dexmedetomidine (amounting to 20 ml) in Dex group. We observed the incidence of PND within 30 days after surgery. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-nine cases were finally analyzed, including 84 cases in Control group and 85 cases in Dex group. Compared with Control group, there was no significant difference in terms of the incidence of PND on the 3rd day and the 7th day (P > 0.05), but the incidence significantly decreased at the 6th hour, at the 24th hour and on the 30th day after surgery (P < 0.05) in Dex group. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine added to ropivacaine for TAPB can reduce the incidence of PND in the first 24 h after surgery and on the 30th postoperative day, which may be related to reduce the consumption of general anesthetics and provide satisfactory postoperative analgesia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 29 /05/ 2021, ChiCTR2100046876.

A comparison of port-site infiltration with bupivacaine alone vs. bupivacaine plus dexemedetomidine after diagnostic staging laparoscopy.

Objectives: To compare the effects of bupivacaine alone and in combination with dexmedetomidine following staging laparoscopies. METHODS: This triple-blinded, prospective study was conducted from June to September 2021 at a tertiary care cancer hospital in Lahore, Pakistan, and comprised adult patients having American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade I-III, weighing >30kg and undergoing diagnostic staging laparoscopy. The subjects were randomised into two equal groups. Group A received 6ml of 2mg/kg bupivacaine at each of the four laparoscopic port sites before skin closure, while group B additionally received 2µg/kg dexmedetomidine. The presence and severity of pain were recorded and assessed at 15 min, 1, 2 and 4 hours as well as at the time of discharge from the post-anaesthesia care unit. The time to first request for rescue analgesia, total morphine consumption, and the occurrence of any side effects during their stay were also recorded. Data was analysed using SPSS 23. RESULTS: Of the 30 patients, 15(50%) were in group A; 10(66.6%) males and 5(33.3%) females with mean age 43.27±7.59 years. There were 15(50%) patients in group B; 12(80%) males and 3(20%) females with mean age 41.36±12.42 years (p>0.05). Of the total, 29(96.66%) patients were classified as American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade II, and 1(3.33%) patient in group A was grade III. There was no significant difference between the groups in any of the outcome measures assessed (p>0.05), and none of the patients experienced any side effect throughout the post-operative stay. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of dexmedetomidine and bupivacaine had no significant improvement in pain relief compared to bupivacaine alone.

Effects of different doses of intranasal dexmedetomidine on related complications and parents' satisfaction in anesthetized children: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Agitation/delirium is commonly seen in children after anesthesia, and a proper dose of dexmedetomidine can prevent this complication. This study aimed to investigate the effects of different doses of Dexmedetomidine (DEX) on agitation/delirium and other complications in anesthetized children, providing clinical evidence for dose recommendations of DEX. METHODS: This study was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A systematic search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Two independent researchers performed literature screening, data extraction, and assessed the methodological quality. Data analysis was conducted using R and STATA 16.0. RESULTS: In the final analysis, 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2521 children were included. The results showed that in comparison to normal saline, 1 µg/kg, 1.5 µg/kg, and 2 µg/kg intranasal DEX significantly reduced the incidence of post-anesthetic emergence agitation in children with the most effective dose being 2 µg/kg (SUCRA = 0.91). Compared with normal saline, 1 µg/kg, 1.5 µg/kg, and 2 µg/kg intranasal DEX reduced patient's need for postoperative analgesia, with the most effective dose being 1.5 µg/kg (SUCRA = 0.78). However, 1 µg/kg DEX performed the best in reducing Pediatric Anaesthesia Emergence Delirium (PAED) Scale score (SUCRA = 0.88). CONCLUSION: Compared with normal saline, intranasal administration of 2 µg/kg DEX and 1.5 µg/kg DEX are the optimal doses to reduce the incidence of agitation and the need for postoperative pain relief in children under general anesthesia. Given effectiveness and safety, intranasal use of 1 µg/kg DEX appears to be the most effective dosage for anesthetized children.

Dexamethasone versus Dexmedetomidine as Adjuvants in Ultrasound Popliteal Sciatic Nerve Block for Hallux Valgus Surgery: A Mono-Centric Retrospective Comparative Study.

Background and Aim: Ultrasound popliteal sciatic nerve block (UPSNB) is commonly performed in foot and ankle surgery. This study aims to assess the use of dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone as adjuvants in UPSNB for hallux valgus (HV) surgery, comparing their efficacy in producing motor and sensory block and controlling postoperative pain. The adverse event rate was also evaluated. Methods: This mono-centric retrospective study included 62 adult patients undergoing HV surgery: 30 patients received lidocaine 2% 200 mg, ropivacaine 0.5% 50 mg and dexamethasone 4 mg (Group 1), whereas 32 patients received lidocaine 2% 200 mg, ropivacaine 0.5% 50 mg, and dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/Kg (Group 2). At first, the visual analogue scale (VAS) was evaluated after 48 hours. The other outcomes were time to motor block regression, evaluation of the first analgesic drug intake, analgesic effect, adverse effects (hemodynamic disorders, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV)) and patient satisfaction. The continuous data were analyzed with student's t-test and the continuous one with χ2. Statistical significance was set at a p-value lower than 0.05. Results: No significant difference was found in VAS after 48 hours (4.5 ± 1.6 vs 4.7 ± 1.7, p = 0.621) to motor block regression (18.9 ± 6.0 vs 18.7 ± 6, p = 0.922). The number of patients that took their first analgesic drug in the first 48 h (p = 0.947 at 6 hours; p = 0.421 at 12 hours; p = 0.122 at 24 hours and p = 0.333 at 48 hours) were not significant. A low and similar incidence of intraoperative hemodynamic disorders was recorded in both groups (hypotension p = 0.593; bradycardia p = 0.881). Neither PONV nor other complication was found. Patients in Group 1 reported a lower degree of interference with sleep (p = 0.001), less interference with daily activities (P = 0.002) and with the affective sphere (P = 0.015) along with a more satisfactory postoperative pain management (p < 0.001) as compared to Group 2. Conclusion: No significant differences were observed in the duration of motor and sensory blockade between patients in both groups. Additionally, both groups showed good pain control with a low rate of adverse effects, even if there was no clinical difference between the groups. However, patients who received dexamethasone reported experiencing less interference with their sleep, daily activities and overall emotional well-being, and overall pain control.