Effect of dexmedetomidine on hemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation: A meta-analysis with meta-regression and trial sequential analysis

Postoperative Dexmedetomidine Infusion and Chronic Postsurgical Pain in Thoracoscopic Pulmonary Nodule Surgery: A Retrospective Study with Propensity-Score-Matched Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Patients frequently suffer from debilitating chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) subsequent to thoracoscopic surgery. The impact of postoperative dexmedetomidine infusion on CPSP remains elusive. This study aimed to scrutinize the effect of dexmedetomidine on both 1-year incidence of CPSP and the quality of recovery after thoracoscopic pulmonary nodule surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis encompassed clinical and follow-up data from 1148 patients undergoing thoracoscopic pulmonary nodule surgery at our institution between September 2021 and August 2022. Depending on whether dexmedetomidine was infused intravenously or not on the first night after surgery, patients were stratified into the dexmedetomidine group or the control group, with propensity score matching applied to harmonize baseline characteristics. Comparative analysis sought to delineate distinctions of CPSP and recovery quality 1 year after surgery.

RESULTS

Following propensity score matching, a cohort of 258 patients in each group underwent analysis. Comparisons after matching revealed no statistically significant disparities in 1-year CPSP incidence [76/258 (29.5%) versus 78/258 (30.2%), P = 0.847], moderate-to-severe pain occurrence [17/76 (22.4%) versus 22/78 (28.2%), P = 0.405], neuropathic pain occurrence [11/76 (14.5%) versus 11/78 (14.1%), P = 0.948], and postoperative recovery quality assessed by 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) score (113.1 [107.2, 116.0] versus 113.0 [107.4, 116.0], P = 0.328). Multivariate logistic regression analysis encompassing the entire cohort identified being female [odds ratio (OR) 2.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59-2.79, P < 0.001) and postoperative rescue analgesia (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.09-1.96, P = 0.010) as risk factors for CPSP, while intraoperative fentanyl dosage (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.98, P = 0.006) emerged as a protective factor.

CONCLUSION

The prolonged administration of dexmedetomidine did not yield discernible amelioration in either 1-year CPSP or the recovery quality after thoracoscopic surgery. Noteworthy risk factors for CPSP encompassed female sex, postoperative rescue analgesia, and diminished fentanyl dosage intraoperatively.

Mapping Theme Trends and Research Frontiers in Dexmedetomidine Over Past Decade: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background

Dexmedetomidine, an α2-adrenergic receptor (α2-AR) agonist, is extensively used in clinical and animal studies owing to its sedative, analgesic, and anxiolytic effects. The diverse range of research domains associated with dexmedetomidine poses challenges in defining pivotal research directions. Therefore, this study aimed to conduct a qualitative and quantitative bibliometric study in the field of dexmedetomidine over the past decade to establish current research trends and emerging frontiers.

Methods

Relevant publications in the field of dexmedetomidine between 2014 and 2023 were extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection database. The bibliometric analysis, incorporating statistical and visual analyses, was conducted using CiteSpace (6.1.R6) and R (4.3.1).

Results

The present study encompassed a total of 5,482 publications, exhibiting a consistent upward trend over the past decade. The United States and its institutions had the highest centrality. Ji, Fuhai, and Ebert, Thomas J. were identified as the most productive author and the most cited author, respectively. As anticipated, the most cited journal was Anesthesiology. Moreover, cluster analysis of cited references and co-occurrence of keywords revealed that recent studies were primarily focused on sedation, delirium, and opioid-free anesthesia. Finally, a timeline view of keywords clusters and keywords burst demonstrated that primary research frontiers were stress response, neuroinflammation, delirium, opioid-free anesthesia, peripheral nerve block, and complications.

Conclusion

Current research trends and directions are focused on sedation, delirium, and opioid-free anesthesia, as evidenced by our results. The frontier of future research is anticipated to encompass basic investigations into dexmedetomidine, including stress response and neuroinflammation, as well as clinical studies focusing on delirium, opioid-free anesthesia, peripheral nerve block, and associated complications.

Clinical adverse events to dexmedetomidine: a real-world drug safety study based on the FAERS database

Objective

Adverse events associated with dexmedetomidine were analyzed using data from the FDA's FAERS database, spanning from 2004 to the third quarter of 2023. This analysis serves as a foundation for monitoring dexmedetomidine's safety in clinical applications.

Methods

Data on adverse events associated with dexmedetomidine were standardized and analyzed to identify clinical adverse events closely linked to its use. This analysis employed various signal quantification analysis algorithms, including Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR), Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN), and Multi-Item Gamma Poisson Shrinker (MGPS).

Results

In the FAERS database, dexmedetomidine was identified as the primary suspect in 1,910 adverse events. Our analysis encompassed 26 organ system levels, from which we selected 346 relevant Preferred Terms (PTs) for further examination. Notably, adverse drug reactions such as diabetes insipidus, abnormal transcranial electrical motor evoked potential monitoring, acute motor axonal neuropathy, and trigeminal cardiac reflex were identified. These reactions are not explicitly mentioned in the drug's specification, indicating the emergence of new signals for adverse drug reactions.

Conclusion

Data mining in the FAERS database has elucidated the characteristics of dexmedetomidine-related adverse drug reactions. This analysis enhances our understanding of dexmedetomidine's drug safety, aids in the clinical management of pharmacovigilance studies, and offers valuable insights for refining drug-use protocols.

Comparative observation of the effectiveness and safety of remimazolam besylate versus dexmedetomidine in gastrointestinal surgery in obese patients

BACKGROUND

Surgery for obese patients carries a higher risk of anesthesia complications compared with surgery for nonobese patients. Thus, a safe and effective anesthesia strategy is necessary to improve the medical experience of such patients and ensure their safety.

AIM

To compared the effectiveness and safety of remimazolam besylate versus dexmedetomidine (DEX) in gastrointestinal surgery in obese patients.

METHODS

The study cohort included 60 obese patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery between July 2021 and April 2023, comprising 30 patients who received DEX intervention (control group) and 30 patients who received remimazolam besylate intervention (research group). Heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), blood oxygen saturation (SpO2), safety (nausea and vomiting, bradycardia, hypotension, and apnea), anesthesia and examination indices [induction time, anesthesia recovery time, and postanesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge time], sedation effect (Ramsay Sedation Scale), and postoperative pain visual analog scale were comparatively analyzed before anesthesia (T0), during anesthesia (T1), and after anesthesia (T2).

RESULTS

At T1, the research group showed significantly smaller changes in HR, RR, MAP, and SpO2 than the control group, with a significantly lower adverse reaction rate and shorter induction, anesthesia recovery, and PACU discharge times. Additionally, the intra- and postoperative Ramsay Sedation Scale scores were statistically higher in the research group than in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Remimazolam besylate was significantly more effective than DEX in gastrointestinal surgery in obese patients and had a higher safety profile and value in clinical promotion.

Effects of an intraoperative intravenous Bolus Dose of Dexmedetomidine on postoperative catheter-related bladder discomfort in male patients undergoing transurethral resection of bladder tumors: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial

PURPOSE

To investigate whether the effect of intravenous bolus doses of dexmedetomidine on postoperative catheter-related bladder discomfort (CRBD) was dose-dependent in male patients undergoing transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURBT).

METHODS

The study protocol was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR 2,000,034,657, date of registration: July 14, 2020). Adult male patients were randomized to one of four groups: placebo (Group C); dexmedetomidine 0.2 µg/kg (Group D 0.2); dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg (Group D 0.5); or dexmedetomidine 1 µg/kg (Group D 1). The primary outcome was the incidence of moderate-to-severe CRBD at 0, 1, 6, 24, and 48 h postoperatively.

RESULTS

The incidence of moderate-to-severe CRBD was significantly lower in Group D 0.5 and Group D 1 than in Group C at 0 h (13% vs. 40%, P = 0.006; 8% vs. 40%, P = 0.001), 1 h (15% vs. 53%, P < 0.001; 13% vs. 53%, P < 0.001), and 6 h (10% vs. 32%, P = 0.025; 8% vs. 32%, P = 0.009) postoperatively. Compared with baseline, both the MAP and HR were significantly lower in Group D 1 at 1 min ([94 ± 15] vs. [104 ± 13] mm Hg, P = 0.003; [64 ± 13] vs. [73 ± 13] bpm, P = 0.001) and 30 min ([93 ± 10] vs. [104 ± 13] mm Hg, P < 0.001; [58 ± 9] vs. [73 ± 13] bpm, P < 0.001) postextubation.

CONCLUSION

The effect of intravenous bolus doses of dexmedetomidine on postoperative CRBD was dose-independent, whereas intravenous administration of 0.5 µg/kg dexmedetomidine reduced the early postoperative incidence of CRBD with minimal side effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial number and registry URL: ChiCTR 2,000,034,657, http://www.chictr.org.cn , date of registration: July 14, 2020.

Comparison of esketamine versus dexmedetomidine for attenuation of cardiovascular stress response to double-lumen tracheal tube intubation: a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

The insertion of a double-lumen tracheal tube may cause a transient but more intense sympathetic response. We examined the effects of esketamine vs. dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to anesthesia induction to blunt double lumen tracheal (DLT) intubation induced cardiovascular stress response.

Methods

In a randomized, double-blind trial, 78 adult patients scheduled for elective thoracotomy under general anesthesia requiring DLT intubation were enrolled. The patients were randomly divided into three groups: each group received one of the following drugs prior to induction of anesthesia: dexmedetomidine 0.8 µg/kg (Group A), esketamine 0.5 mg/kg (Group B), or normal saline (group C). The primary outcome was the incidence of a DLT intubation-related cardiovascular stress response, defined as an increase in mean arterial pressure or heart rate of >30% above the baseline values. The secondary outcomes were changes in hemodynamic and cardiac function.

Results

The incidence of the response to cardiovascular stress was 23.1%, 30.8%, and 65.4% in groups A, B, and C, respectively. There was a significant decrease in intubation response in groups A and B in comparison with group C (P < 0.01); however, there was no significant difference between group A and group B (P > 0.05). Following the drug infusion and the induction of anesthesia, there was a significant decrease in HR and cardiac output in group A compared with group B. In contrast, no significant differences were observed in the left ventricular ejection fraction or in stroke volume between the three groups during induction of anesthesia.

Discussion

Esketamine 0.5 mg/kg and dexmedetomidine 0.8 µg/kg attenuate cardiovascular stress responses related to DLT intubation. As adjuvants to etomidate induction, they do not impair cardiac function (ChiCTR1900028030).

Nebulized dexmedetomidine for attenuating hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation in adult patients undergoing surgeries under general anaesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Sympathetic stimulation associated with laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation (ETI) may lead to adverse cardio-/cerebro-vascular events in susceptible patients. Nebulization is a novel route for dexmedetomidine administration providing a large surface area for absorption while avoiding bradycardia and hypotension associated with intravenous route. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine nebulization for attenuating hemodynamic response to ETI in adult patients undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia.

METHODS

This systematic review was registered prospectively in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023403624). PubMed, Embase (OvidSP), Cochrane library, Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science (Clarivate) and Google Scholar were systematically searched from database inception until March 31, 2023. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and then full text against pre-specified eligibility criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing effect of dexmedetomidine nebulization on hemodynamic response to ETI in adult patients undergoing surgeries under general anaesthesia were included. All studies reporting heart rate and systolic blood pressure at baseline and various time points after ETI were included. A pre-piloted data extraction form, Cochrane revised risk-of-bias tool (ROB 2) tool, GRADE approach and RevMan 5.4.1 (Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark) were used for data extraction, risk of bias assessment, rating certainty of evidence and data synthesis respectively. Mean difference and relative risk with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) were used for continuous and dichotomous variables respectively.

RESULTS

Six RCTs randomized 480 patients with ASA I/II patients aged < 60 years of age and undergoing elective surgeries to receive either dexmedetomidine (n = 240) or saline nebulization (n = 240). Except for one RCT which used 2 μg/kg, all other RCTs used dexmedetomidine dose of 1 μg /kg. Heart rate, systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group at all the measured time points after laryngoscopy and ETI with the only exception being systolic blood pressure at 3 min [mean difference -13.86 (95% CI -30.01 to 2.99), p = 0.09]. Bradycardia and hypotension as adverse effects were absent across the included studies. However, only one-third of the included studies had a low risk of bias and strength of evidence was very low according to the GRADE assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to placebo, premedication with dexmedetomidine nebulization was associated with lower HR and BP following ETI without any risk of bradycardia and hypotension. However, the strength of evidence was very poor and came from just one country. Future well designed and conducted studies in different populations are warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42023403624.

Comparison of oxygen reserve index according to the remimazolam or dexmedetomidine for intraoperative sedation under regional anesthesia-A single-blind randomized controlled trial

Introduction

We aimed to evaluate the difference in intraoperative oxygen reserve index (ORi) between the sedatives remimazolam (RMMZ) and dexmedetomidine (DEX).

Methods

Seventy-eight adult patients scheduled for sedation under regional anesthesia were randomly assigned to either the DEX (n = 39) or RMMZ (n = 39) group. The primary outcome was the difference in perioperative ORi between the groups. The secondary outcomes included respiratory depression, hypo- or hypertension, heart rate (HR), blood pressure, respiratory rate and postoperative outcomes. Additionally, the number of patients who experienced a decrease in intraoperative ORi to < 50% and the associated factors were analyzed.

Results

The ORi was significantly higher in the RMMZ group at 15 min after sedation maintenance. There were no significant differences in respiratory depression between the two groups. The intraoperative HR was significantly higher in the RMMZ group after the induction of sedation, 15 min after sedation maintenance, and at the end of surgery. No other results were significantly different between the two groups. The incidence of a decrease in intraoperative ORi to < 50% was significantly higher in the DEX group. Factors associated with a decrease in the intraoperative ORi to < 50% were diabetes mellitus, low baseline peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), and DEX use. In the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for a decrease in the intraoperative ORi to < 50%, the cutoff baseline SpO2 was 97%.

Conclusion

RMMZ is recommended as a sedative for patients with a low baseline SpO2 and intraoperative bradycardia. Further studies should be conducted to establish the criteria for a significant ORi reduction.

Evaluation of the Perioperative Effects of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam-Ketamine Premedication in Strabismus Surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects of intranasal dexmedetomidine and midazolam-ketamine combination for premedication on sedation quality, oculocardiac reflex development, mask tolerance, and separation from parents in children who would undergo strabismus surgery.

METHODS

A total of 74 patients aged 2 to 11 years, were divided into two groups. The dexmedetomidine group (n = 37) received 1 mcg/kg of dexmedetomidine and the midalozam-ketamine group (n = 37) received 0.1 mg/kg of midazolam and 7.5 mg/kg of ketamine combination intranasally. Mean arterial pressure, peripheral oxygen saturation, Ramsay Sedation Scale values, and heart rate were recorded before and after the premedication. The children's separation from the family scores were evaluated and recorded. The mask compliance was evaluated and recorded. Patients who developed oculocardiac reflex and were administered atropine were recorded. In the postoperative period, nausea and vomiting, recovery times, and postoperative agitation were evaluated.

RESULTS

Ramsay Sedation Scale scores, mask acceptance, and family separation scores were similar in both groups (P > .05). Oculocardiac reflex was observed more in the dexmedetomidine group (P = .048). Atro-pine requirement and postoperative nausea and vomiting rates were similar in both groups (P > .05). Mean arterial pressures and heart rates were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group during the pre-medication period. The recovery time was longer in the midazolam-ketamine group (P < .001). The incidence of postoperative agitation was significantly lower in the midazolam-ketamine group (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The sedation efficacy of intranasal dexmedetomidine and midazolam-ketamine combination that were given in premedication was similar. Oculocardiac reflex was observed more with dexmedetomidine. The recovery time was prolonged in the midazolam-ketamine group, but postoperative agitation was observed less. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2023;60(6):427-434.].

Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Two Different Doses of Esketamine Combined Infusion on the Quality of Recovery in Patients Undergoing Modified Radical Mastectomy for Breast Cancer - A Randomised Controlled Study

Purpose

This study evaluated the effect of a combined infusion of dexmedetomidine and esketamine on the quality of recovery in patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy.

Methods

A total of 135 patients were randomly divided into three groups: dexmedetomidine group (group D) received dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg loading, 0.4 µg/kg/h infusion), dexmedetomidine plus low-dose esketamine group (group DE1) received dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg loading, 0.4 µg/kg/h infusion) and esketamine (0.5 mg/kg loading, 2 µg/kg/min infusion), dexmedetomidine plus high-dose esketamine group (group DE2) received dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg loading, 0.4 µg/kg/h infusion) and esketamine (0.5 mg/kg loading, 4 µg/kg/min infusion). The primary outcome was the overall quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores at 1 day after surgery. The secondary endpoints were total QoR-15 scores at 3 days after surgery, propofol and remifentanil requirement, awaking and extubation time, postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, rescue analgesic, nausea and vomiting, bradycardia, excessive sedation, nightmares, and agitation.

Results

The overall QoR-15 scores were much higher in groups DE1 and DE2 than in groups D 1 and D 3 days after surgery (P < 0.05). VAS pain scores at 6, 12, 24 h postoperatively, propofol and remifentanil requirements were significantly lower in groups DE1 and DE2 than in group D (P < 0.05). Compared with group D, awaking time, extubation time, and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay were significantly prolonged in groups DE1 and DE2 (P < 0.05) and were much longer in group DE2 than in group DE1 (P < 0.05). The proportion of postoperative rescue analgesics and bradycardia was higher and the incidence of excessive sedation was lower in group D than in groups DE1 and DE2 (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Dexmedetomidine plus esketamine partly improved postoperative recovery quality and decreased the incidence of bradycardia but prolonged awaking time, extubation time, and PACU stay, especially dexmedetomidine plus 4 µg/kg/min esketamine.

Genetic polymorphisms are associated with individual susceptibility to dexmedetomidine

Introduction: Dexmedetomidine (DXM) is widely used as an adjuvant to anesthesia or a sedative medicine, and differences in individual sensitivity to the drug exist. This study aimed to investigate the effect of genetic polymorphisms on these differences. Methods: A total of 112 patients undergoing hand surgery were recruited. DXM 0.5 μg/kg was administered within 10 min and then continuously injected (0.4 μg/kg/h). Narcotrend index, effective dose and onset time of sedation, MAP, and HR were measured. Forty-five single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected for genotype. Results: We observed individual differences in the sedation and hemodynamics induced by DXM. ABCG2 rs2231142, CYP2D6 rs16947, WBP2NL rs5758550, KATP rs141294036, KCNMB1 rs11739136, KCNMA1 rs16934182, ABCC9 rs11046209, ADRA2A rs1800544, and ADRB2 rs1042713 were shown to cause statistically significant (p < 0.05) influence on the individual variation of DXM on sedation and hemodynamics. Moreover, the multiple linear regression analysis indicated sex, BMI, and ADRA2A rs1800544 are statistically related to the effective dose of DXM sedation. Discussion: The evidence suggests that the nine SNPs involved in transport proteins, metabolic enzymes, and target proteins of DXM could explain the individual variability in the sedative and hemodynamic effects of DXM. Therefore, with SNP genotyping, these results could guide personalized medication and promote clinical and surgical management.

Dexmedetomidine vs. Fentanyl-Midazolam Combination to Mitigate the Stress Response in Microlaryngoscopy: A Randomized Double-blind Clinical Trial

Background

Laryngoscopy is the most painful noxious stimulus during anesthesia and surgery. Dexmedetomidine is increasingly used as a sedative in surgeries involving microlaryngoscopy.

Objectives

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of dexmedetomidine and a combination of fentanyl and midazolam on mitigating the stress response in patients scheduled for microlaryngoscopy.

Methods

This randomized, double-blind clinical trial enrolled 60 patients (28 males and 32 females) aged 18 - 65 years with the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I - III. The patients were scheduled for microlaryngoscopy and equally divided into 2 groups. Group D received 1 μg/kg of dexmedetomidine and saline bolus dose over 10 minutes before general anesthesia (GA) induction, followed by 0.5 μg/kg/h of dexmedetomidine and saline infusions after GA induction. Group MF received 0.8 μg/kg of fentanyl plus 0.05 mg/kg of midazolam over 10 minutes before GA induction, followed by 1 μg/kg/h of fentanyl plus 0.05 mg/kg/h of midazolam as an infusion. The heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) pressure were recorded from baseline until the end of surgery. Infusions were stopped at the end of the surgery.

Results

The number of patients requiring propofol and intraoperative supplemental propofol was significantly lower in group D than in group MF. The heart rate was significantly lower in group D than in group MF (P = 0.022, 0.048, 0.032, 0.045, 0.041, 0.026, 0.030, and 0.036) from induction until the end of surgery; in addition, it was comparable between both groups at baseline and before induction. MAP was comparable between both groups for all measurements.

Conclusions

Dexmedetomidine mitigates the hemodynamic changes related to microlaryngoscopy more effectively than the fentanyl-midazolam combination.

Clinical observation of different dosages of dexmedetomidine combined with a target-controlled infusion of propofol in hysteroscopic submucosal myomectomy

Objective

This study aimed to explore the clinical effects of different dosages of dexmedetomidine (Dex) combined with a target-controlled infusion of propofol in hysteroscopic submucosal myomectomy.

Methods

Ninety patients who underwent hysteroscopic submucosal myomectomy between September 2021 and March 2022 were enrolled and randomly divided into three groups, with 30 patients in each group. Patients in Groups A, B, and C received injections of 0.25, 0.5, or 0.75 µg/kg of Dex, respectively, by intravenous pump over 10 min. After this time, a maintenance dosage of 0.5 µg/kg/h was administered by intravenous infusion until the end of the surgery. Anesthesia was induced using 1.5 mg/kg of propofol and 0.3 µg/kg of sufentanil that were introduced through a laryngeal mask. The plasma concentration of propofol was maintained at 3 µg/ml by target-controlled infusion until the end of the surgery. The mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), and electroencephalographic bispectral index (BIS) were observed when the patient entered the operating room (T0), after catheter indwelling for anesthesia (T1), at the time of cervical dilation (T2), at the time of hysteroscopic surgery (T3), and at the end of the surgery (T4) in all three groups. The total dosage of propofol for induction and maintenance, anesthesia awakening time, orientation recovery time, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score of the post-awakening uterine contraction pain, and adverse reactions were recorded.

Results

The intraoperative reductions of MAP and HR in patients were significant in Group C when compared with those in Groups A and B (P < 0.05), and BIS was significantly lower in Group C at T2 and T3 when compared with the baseline measurement at T0 (P < 0.05). The dosage of propofol was significantly higher for Group A than for Groups B and C (P < 0.05). The anesthesia awakening time and orientation recovery time were significantly longer for patients in Group C when compared with patients in Groups A and B (P < 0.05). Within 5-30 min after awakening, the VAS scores in Groups B and C were significantly lower than those for Group A (P < 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in Group B was significantly less than that for Groups A and C (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The continuous pumping of 0.5 µg/kg of Dex combined with a target-controlled infusion of propofol in hysteroscopic submucosal myomectomy resulted in positive anesthetic and analgesia effects and fewer adverse reactions. It therefore has high clinical significance.

Effect of co-administration of intravenous lidocaine and dexmedetomidine on the recovery from laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Some evidences have reported that intravenous lidocaine and dexmedetomidine alone can improve the quality of recovery after surgery. The main purpose of our study to explore whether co-administration of lidocaine and dexmedetomidine infusion could further improve the quality of recovery after laparoscopic hysterectomy compared to either lidocaine or dexmedetomidine administration.

METHODS

A total of 160 subjects were randomly allocated to four groups: the control group (group C) received an equal volume of normal saline, the lidocaine group (group L) received lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg for bolus over 10 min before induction of anesthesia, 1.5 mg/kg/h for continuous infusion), the dexmedetomidine group (group D) received dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg for bolus over 10 min before induction of anesthesia, 0.4 µg/kg/h for continuous infusion), the lidocaine plus dexmedetomidine group (group LD) received lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg for bolus over 10 min before induction of anesthesia, 1.5 mg/kg/h for continuous infusion) and dexmedetomidine combined infusion (0.5 µg/kg for bolus over 10 minutes before induction of anesthesia, 0.4 µg/kg/h for continuous infusion). The primary endpoint was the quality of recovery-40 (QoR-40) scores on postoperative day 1 (POD1). The quality of sleep on POD1, remifentanil total dose, visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, the number of patients with self-press the pump, time to open eye and extubation, length of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, the incidence of intraoperative bradycardia, hypotension, arrhythmias, hypoxemia in the PACU, and nausea or vomiting within 24 h after surgery were regarded as the secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The total QoR-40 scores were significantly increased in groups L, D, and LD on POD1 compared with group C (all P<0.05). The total QoR-40 scores were the highest in group LD on POD1 compared to other three groups (all P<0.001). Sleep quality was significantly improved in group LD compared to other three groups on POD1 (all P<0.05). The VAS pain scores were obviously reduced at 8 h in group L and at 4, 8 h in group D after surgery compared to group C and were the lowest in group LD (all P<0.05). The number of patients with self-press the pump was significantly reduced in groups D and LD compared to group C (8(20.0%) and 27(67.5%), P<0.001; 2(5.0%) and 27(67.5%), P<0.001, respectively). Length of PACU stay significantly prolonged in groups D (21.7±3.0) and LD (25.5±4.0) compared to group C (19.6±3.3) (P=0.028, P<0.001). The incidence of intraoperative bradycardia was significantly higher in groups D and LD than in groups C and L (all P<0.001). The rate of hypoxemia was higher in groups D (55.0%) and LD (70.0%) than in groups C (15.0%) and L (20.0%) (all P<0.05). The incidence of nausea was lower in group LD (10.0%) than in group C (37.5%) (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Co-administration of lidocaine plus dexmedetomidine infusion improved to some extent the quality of recovery on POD1 compared to lidocaine and dexmedetomidine alone, but it significantly increased the incidence of intraoperative bradycardia and hypoxemia in the PACU, and prolonged the length of PACU stay.

Dexmedetomidine premedication increases preoperative sedation and inhibits stress induced by tracheal intubation in adult: a prospective randomized double-blind clinical study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this prospective randomized double-blind study is to evaluate whether oral dexmedetomidine (DEX) premedication could increase sedation in order to reduce preoperative anxiety and inhibit stress response during general anesthesia tracheal intubation.

MATERIALS

A total of 100 ASA I and II adult patients undergoing elective neurosurgery were randomly divided into the control group (C group, n = 50) and the oral DEX premedication (DEX group, n = 50). Patients were administrated 4 μg/kg dexmedetomidine orally pre-anesthesia 120 min. Hemodynamic variables were monitored and recorded from premedication to 10 min after tracheal intubation. The primary outcome, the sedation level of all participants, was evaluated by Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS), and Numerical Rating Scale was to measure their intensity of thirst and satisfaction of patients' family members. During general anesthesia induction, the total dosage of induction anesthetics and complications relative to anesthesia induction were recorded. After tracheal intubation, blood sample was drain from radial atrial line to measure levels of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and cortisol.

RESULTS

RASS scores at 60 min after premedication and on arrival in the operating room were significantly reduced in the DEX group (P < 0.001). Oral DEX premedication not only increased the intensity of thirst but also the satisfaction of their family members (P < 0.001). The cortisol level after tracheal intubation was deduced by oral DEX premedication (P < 0.05). Oral DEX premedication reduced heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) on arrival in the operating room, and HR when tracheal intubation (P < 0.05). During the whole process of anesthesia induction, although the lowest MAP in two groups were not significantly different, the lowest HR was significantly lower in the DEX group (P < 0.05). Oral DEX premedication might reduce HR from premedication to 10 min after tracheal intubation. However MAP was reduced just from premedication to on arrival in the operating room. Total induction dosages of propofol, midazolam, sulfentanil and rocuronium were similar in two groups (P > 0.05), as well as the complications relative to anesthesia induction and cases of rescue dopamine therapy were similar (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Oral DEX 4 μg/kg premedication was an efficient intervention to increase preoperative sedation and reduce stress reaction induced by general anesthesia tracheal intubation, but also it was with the stable hemodynamic during the process of general anesthesia tracheal intubation, and improved the satisfaction of patients' family members. In this study, the sparing-anesthetic effect of 4 μg/kg DEX oral premedication was not significant, and this would be needed to study in future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trail was registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( https://www.chictr.org.cn , Jie Gao) on 15/04/2021, registration number was ChiCTR2100045458.

Dexmedetomidine Increases MMP-12 and MBP Concentrations after Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery with Extracorporeal Circulation Anaesthesia without Impacting Cognitive Function: A Randomised Control Trial

Postoperative neurological deficits remain a concern for patients undergoing cardiac surgeries. Even minor injuries can lead to neurocognitive decline (i.e., postoperative cognitive dysfunction). Dexmedetomidine may be beneficial given its reported neuroprotective effect. We aimed to investigate the effects of dexmedetomidine on brain injury during cardiac surgery anaesthesia. This prospective observational study analysed data for 46 patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft surgery with extracorporeal circulation between August 2018 and March 2019. The patients were divided into two groups: control (CON) with typical anaesthesia and dexmedetomidine (DEX) with dexmedetomidine infusion. Concentrations of the biomarkers matrix metalloproteinase-12 (MMP-12) and myelin basic protein (MBP) were measured preoperatively and at 24 and 72 h postoperatively. Cognitive evaluations were performed preoperatively, at discharge, and 3 months after discharge using Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination version III (ACE-III). The primary endpoint was the ACE-III score at discharge. Increased MMP-12 and MBP concentrations were observed in the DEX group 24 and 72 h postoperatively. No significant differences in ACE-III scores were observed between the groups at discharge; however, the values were increased when compared with initial values after 3 months (p = 0.000). The current results indicate that the administration of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to anaesthesia can increase MMP-12 and MBP levels without effects on neurocognitive outcomes at discharge and 3 months postoperatively.

Impact of intravenous dexmedetomidine on gastrointestinal function recovery after laparoscopic hysteromyomectomy: a randomized clinical trial

Postoperative intestinal ileus is common after laparoscopic surgery, the incidence of those after hysterectomy was 9.2%. Anesthesia is one of the independent risk factors of postoperative ileus. Dexmedetomidine has been widely used in perioperative anesthesia and previous reports suggested that intraoperative dexmedetomidine may be associated with the improvement of gastrointestinal function recovery after abdominal surgery. We hypothesized that dexmedetomidine could improve gastrointestinal function recovery after laparoscopic hysteromyomectomy. Participants in elective laparoscopic hysteromyomectomy were enrolled with a single dose of 0.5 μg kg⁻¹ dexmedetomidine or the same volume of placebo intravenously administered for 15 min, followed by continuous pumping of 0.2 μg kg⁻¹ h⁻¹ of corresponding drugs until 30 min before the end of surgery. The primary outcome was the time to first flatus. Secondary outcomes were the time to first oral feeding and the first defecation, the occurrence of flatulence, pain score and postoperative nausea and vomiting until 48 h after the surgery. Eventually, 106 participants (54 in dexmedetomidine group and 52 in placebo group) were included for final analysis. The time to first flatus (SD, 25.83 [4.18] vs 27.67 [3.77], P = 0.019), oral feeding time (SD, 27.29 [4.40] vs 28.92 [3.82], P = 0.044), the time to first defecation (SD, 59.82 [10.49] vs 63.89 [7.71], P = 0.025), abdominal distension (n%, 12 (22.2) vs 21 (40.4), P = 0.044), PONV at 24 h (n%, 10 (18.5) vs 19 (36.5), P = 0.037), NRS 6 h (3.15(0.68) vs 3.46 (0.87), P = 0.043) and NRS 12 h (3.43 (0.88) vs 3.85 (0.85), P = 0.014) of dexmedetomidine group were significantly shorter than those of the placebo group. Intraoperative dexmedetomidine reduced the time to first flatus, first oral feeding, and first defecation. These results suggested that this treatment may be a feasible strategy for improving postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic hysteromyomectomy.

Dexmedetomidine attenuates lipopolysaccharide-induced inflammation through macrophageal IL-10 expression following α7 nAchR activation

Dexmedetomidine, a highly selective α₂-adrenoceptor agonist, has been recently reported to alleviate systemic inflammatory response induced by lipopolysaccharide (LPS), in addition to its sedative, analgesic, bradycardic and hypotensive properties. This study aimed to illustrate the molecular mechanisms underlying dexmedetomidine-induced anti-inflammation. In the LPS-pretreated mice, subcutaneous injection of dexmedetomidine reduced the spleen weight as well as serum and spleen expression of proinflammatory cytokines, tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-1β, and increased serum and spleen expression of IL-10, a known anti-inflammatory cytokine. In addition, dexmedetomidine-attenuated proinflammatory cytokine reduction was entirely inhibited by selective α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) antagonist methyllycaconitine but not α₂-adrenoceptor antagonist yohimbine. Dexmedetomidine also increased macrophageal IL-10 expression in the presence and absence of LPS, which was also attenuated by methyllycaconitine but not yohimbine. Furthermore, the stimulatory effect of dexmedetomidine on the expression of IL-10 was also reduced by the α7 nAChR gene silencer siRNA/α7 nAChR. Lastly, pretreatment with the IL-10 neutralizing antibody reversed dexmedetomidine-supressed expression of proinflammatory cytokines. Our findings illustrate that dexmedetomidine-induced anti-inflammation is through macrophageal expression of IL-10 following activation of α7 nAchRs but not α₂-adrenoceptors.

Effects of Dexmedetomidine on Hemodynamics and Anesthesia Effect of Different Doses of General Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Hepatobiliary Surgery

In order to provide corresponding anesthesia methods of hepatobiliary diseases and obtain better clinical effect, the hemodynamics and clinical efficacy are evaluated by using different doses of dexamethasone (DEX) during the operation. 97 patients undergoing general anesthesia for hepatobiliary surgery in our hospital from April 2020 to August 2021 are analyzed retrospectively. All patients are divided into G1 (n = 24), G2 (n = 24), G3 (n = 24), and control group (n = 25) according to the random number table method. The G1, G2, and G3 groups are injected with DEX 1.0 ug/kg, DEX 0.8 ug/kg, and DEX 0.5 ug/kg by intravenous infusion pump before induction of general anesthesia, and the control group is injected with 0.9%Nacl solution 10 mL. Intraoperative anesthesia time, postoperative eye opening time, and extubation time of all groups are observed, and the incidences of postoperative adverse reactions are compared. The experimental results show that during general anesthesia in the liver and gallbladder surgery, the patients with high dose of DEX can better maintain the intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, and effectively restrain the postoperative stress reaction.

Efficacy and Safety of Ultrasound Guided-Deep Serratus Anterior Plane Blockade With Different Doses of Dexmedetomidine for Women Undergoing Modified Radical Mastectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Ultrasound guided-deep serratus anterior plane block (USG-DSAPB) has been used for pain management of patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy (MRM), but evidence supporting their adjuvant analgesic benefits is limited. We explored the efficacy and safety of preemptive use of ropivacaine combined with different doses of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in USG-DSAPB for patients undergoing MRM.

Methods

Ninety-five female patients undergoing unilateral MRM were allocated randomly to two groups. Group RD1 had 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine with 5 mg of dexamethasone and 0.5 μg·kg⁻¹ DEX in USG-DSAPB. Group RD2 had 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine with 5 mg of dexamethasone and 1 μg·kg⁻¹ DEX in USG-DSAPB. The primary outcome was sufentanil consumption 72 h after USG-DSAPB. Secondary outcomes were: postoperative pain scores and level of sedation; intraoperative hemodynamics; duration of post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay; prevalence of moderate-to-severe pain; one-time puncture success; procedure time of blockade; time to first rescue analgesia; requirement of rescue analgesia; satisfaction scores of patients and surgeons; duration of hospital stay; adverse events; prevalence of chronic pain; quality of postoperative functional recovery.

Results

Compared with the RD1 group, the visual analog scale score for coughing was significantly lower at 4, 8, 12 h and sufentanil consumption was significantly lower at 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 h after surgery in the RD2 group (P < 0.05). The time to first rescue analgesia was significantly longer in the RD2 group (P < 0.05). The requirement for rescue analgesia was significantly higher in the RD1 group (P < 0.05). The prevalence of moderate-to-severe pain, number of patients using vasoactive agents, duration of PACU stay, as well as consumption of propofol, remifentanil, and DEX were significantly lower in the RD2 group (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to one-time puncture success, procedure time of blockade, total dermatomal spread, satisfaction scores of patients and surgeons, postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, 40-item Quality of Recovery questionnaire (QoR-40) score, or prevalence of chronic pain (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

We discovered that 1 μg·kg⁻¹ (not 0.5 μg·kg⁻¹) DEX combined with 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine and 5 mg of dexamethasone in USG-DSAPB could provide superior postoperative analgesia for patients undergoing MRM. However, the quality of postoperative functional recovery and prevalence of chronic pain were similar.

Clinical Trial Registration:http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=54929, identifier: ChiCTR2000033685.

Opioid-free anesthesia in oncologic surgery: the rules of the game

BACKGROUND

Opioids are frequently used in the postoperative period due to their analgesic properties. While these drugs reduce nociceptive somatic, visceral, and neuropathic pain, they may also lead to undesirable effects such as respiratory depression, urinary retention, nausea and vomiting, constipation, itching, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, tolerance, addiction, and immune system disorders. Anesthesiologists are in the critical position of finding balance between using opioids when they are necessary and implementing opioid-sparing strategies to avoid the known harmful effects. This article aims to give an overview of opioid-free anesthesia.

MAIN BODY

This paper presents an overview of opioid-free anesthesia and opioid-sparing anesthetic techniques. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies are discussed, highlighting the possible advantages and drawbacks of each approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Choosing the best anesthetic protocol for a patient undergoing cancer surgery is not an easy task and the available literature provides no definitive answers. In our opinion, opioid-sparing strategies should always be implemented in routine practice and opioid-free anesthesia should be considered whenever possible. Non-pharmacological strategies such as patient education, while generally underrepresented in scientific literature, may warrant consideration in clinical practice.

Preoperative Dexmedetomidine and intraoperative bradycardia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

Background

While laparoscopic surgical procedures have various advantages over traditional open techniques, artificial pneumoperitoneum is associated with severe bradycardia and cardiac arrest. Dexmedetomidine, an imidazole derivative that selectively binds to α²-receptors and has sedative and analgesic properties, can cause hypotension and bradycardia. Our primary aim was to assess the association between dexmedetomidine use and intraoperative bradycardia during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

We performed a systematic review with a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis using the following PICOS: adult patients undergoing endotracheal intubation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (P); intravenous dexmedetomidine before tracheal intubation (I); no intervention or placebo administration (C); intraoperative bradycardia (primary outcome), intraoperative hypotension, hemodynamics at intubation (systolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, heart rate), dose needed for induction of anesthesia, total anesthesia requirements (both hypnotics and opioids) throughout the procedure, and percentage of patients requiring postoperative analgesics and experiencing postoperative nausea and vomiting and/or shivering (O); randomized controlled trials (S).

Results

Fifteen studies were included in the meta-analysis (980 patients). Compared to patients that did not receive dexmedetomidine, those who did had a higher risk of developing intraoperative bradycardia (RR: 2.81, 95% CI [1.34, 5.91]) and hypotension (1.66 [0.92, 2.98]); however, they required a lower dose of intraoperative anesthetics and had a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. In the trial sequential analysis for bradycardia, the cumulative z-score crossed the monitoring boundary for harm at the tenth trial.

Conclusions

Patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy who receive dexmedetomidine during tracheal intubation are more likely to develop intraoperative bradycardia and hypotension.

Trial Sequential Analysis explained using a post-hoc analysis of meta-analyses published in Korean Journal of Anesthesiology

Background

Trial sequential analysis (TSA) is a recent cumulative meta-analysis method used to weigh type I and II errors and to estimate when the effect is large enough to be unaffected by further studies. The aim of this study was to illustrate possible TSA scenarios and their significance using meta-analyses published in the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology (KJA) as working material.

Methods

We performed a systematic medical literature search for meta-analyses published in the KJA. TSA was performed on each main outcome, estimating the required sample size on the calculated effect size for the intervention, considering a type I error of 5% and a power of 90% or 99%.

Results

Six meta-analyses with a total of ten main outcomes were included in the analysis. Seven TSAs confirmed the results of the meta-analyses. However, only three of them reached the required sample size. In the two TSAs, the cumulative z-lines were not statistically significant. One TSA boundary for effect was reached with the 90% analysis, but not with the 99% analysis.

Conclusions

In TSA, a meta-analysis pooled effect may be established to assess if the cumulative sample size is large enough. TSA can be used to add strength to the conclusions of meta-analyses; however, pre-registration of the TSA protocol is of paramount importance. This study could be useful to better understand the use of TSA as an additional statistical tool to improve meta-analysis quality.