A randomised controlled trial of intravenous dexmedetomidine added to dexamethasone for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and duration of interscalene block

Primary outcomes and anticipated effect sizes in randomised clinical trials assessing adjuncts to peripheral nerve blocks: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Prolonging effects of adjuncts to local anaesthetics in peripheral nerve blocks have been demonstrated in randomised clinical trials. The chosen primary outcome and anticipated effect size have major impact on the clinical relevance of results in these trials. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of frequently used outcomes and anticipated effect sizes in randomised trials on peripheral nerve block adjuncts.

METHODS

For our scoping review, we searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL for trials assessing effects of adjuncts for peripheral nerve blocks published in 10 major anaesthesia journals. We included randomised clinical trials assessing adjuncts for single-shot ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks, regardless of the type of interventional adjunct and control group, local anaesthetic used and anatomical localization. Our primary outcome was the choice of primary outcomes and corresponding anticipated effect size used for sample size estimation. Secondary outcomes were assessor of primary outcomes, the reporting of sample size calculations and statistically significant and non-significant results related to the anticipated effect sizes.

RESULTS

Of 11,854 screened trials, we included 59. The most frequent primary outcome was duration of analgesia (35/59 trials, 59%) with absolute and relative median (interquartile range) anticipated effect sizes for adjunct versus placebo/no adjunct: 240 min (180-318) and 30% (25-40) and for adjunct versus active comparator: 210 min (180-308) and 17% (15-28). Adequate sample size calculations were reported in 78% of trials. Statistically significant results were reported for primary outcomes in 45/59 trials (76%), of which 22% did not reach the anticipated effect size.

CONCLUSION

The reported outcomes and associated anticipated effect sizes can be used in future trials on adjuncts for peripheral nerve blocks to increase methodological homogeneity.

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.

Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam Besylate versus Dexmedetomidine for Patients Undergoing Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

Remimazolam besylate is a novel ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine that is rapidly hydrolyzed to zolpidem propionic acid by tissue lipases. We designed this study to compare the safety and efficacy of remimazolam besylate alfentanil versus dexmedetomidine-alfentanil for fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FB).

Methods

One hundred and twenty patients undergoing FB into this prospective randomized controlled trial were divided into two groups. The anesthesia induction consisted of 6 mg/kg/h of remimazolam besylate in the RA group and 0.5 μg/kg of dexmedetomidine in the DA group. 1-2 mg/kg/h of remimazolam besylate or 0.2-0.7 µg/kg/h of dexmedetomidine were administered to maintain during FB. The lowest oxygen saturation, success rate of FB, hemodynamics, time metrics, bronchoscopy feasibility, drug dose requirements, patient and bronchoscopist satisfaction scores, occurrence of intraoperative awareness, number of patients willing to repeat FB with the same sedation regimen, and occurrence and severity of adverse events.

Results

The lowest oxygen saturation during the FB was significantly higher in the RA group (P = 0.001). Compared with the variables in the DA group, peripheral oxygen saturation, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure were significantly lower at T2 and T3 in the RA group (P < 0.05). Heart rates were significantly higher from T2 to T4 in the DA group (P < 0.05). More patients experienced bradycardia in the DA group (P = 0.041). Compared with time metrics in the DA group, the induction time, fully-alert time, and recovery room-leaving time were all significantly shorter in the RA group (P < 0.05). The bronchoscopy feasibility scores in the RA group were significantly lower at T2, whereas they were lower at T3 in the DA group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Remimazolam besylate is superior to dexmedetomidine when combined with alfentanil during FB, promoting faster patients' recovery, better operative conditions and respiratory stability with similar rates of occurrence and severity of adverse events.

Combined Dexamethasone and Dexmedetomidine as Adjuncts to Popliteal and Saphenous Nerve Blocks in Patients Undergoing Surgery of the Foot or Ankle: A Randomized, Blinded, Placebo-controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Both dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine increase the duration of analgesia of peripheral nerve blocks. The authors hypothesized that combined intravenous dexamethasone and intravenous dexmedetomidine would result in a greater duration of analgesia when compared with intravenous dexamethasone alone and placebo.

METHODS

The authors randomly allocated participants undergoing surgery of the foot or ankle under general anesthesia and with a combined popliteal (sciatic) and saphenous nerve block to a combination of 12 mg dexamethasone and 1 µg/kg dexmedetomidine, 12 mg dexamethasone, or placebo (saline). The primary outcome was the duration of analgesia measured as the time from block performance until the first sensation of pain in the surgical area as reported by the participant. The authors predefined a 33% difference in the duration of analgesia as clinically relevant.

RESULTS

A total of 120 participants from two centers were randomized and 119 analyzed for the primary outcome. The median [interquartile range] duration of analgesia was 1,572 min [1,259 to 1,715] with combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine, 1,400 min [1,133 to 1,750] with dexamethasone alone, and 870 min [748 to 1,138] with placebo. Compared with placebo, the duration was greater with combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine (difference, 564 min; 98.33% CI, 301 to 794; P < 0.001) and with dexamethasone (difference, 489 min; 98.33% CI, 265 to 706; P < 0.001). The prolongations exceeded the authors' predefined clinically relevant difference. The duration was similar when combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine was compared with dexamethasone alone (difference, 61 min; 98.33% CI, -222 to 331; P = 0.614).

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone with or without dexmedetomidine increased the duration of analgesia in patients undergoing surgery of the foot or ankle with a popliteal (sciatic) and saphenous nerve block. Combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine did not increase the duration of analgesia when compared with dexamethasone.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Effects of combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine as adjuncts to peripheral nerve blocks: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE

The effects of combining dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine on block duration are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of combining dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine on block duration.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, the Web of Science, and BIOSIS until June 8, 2023. RCTs with adults undergoing surgery with a peripheral nerve block randomized to combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine versus placebo or other adjuncts were eligible. Primary outcome was duration of analgesia. We performed meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, risk of bias-2, and Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation assessment.

FINDINGS

We included 9 RCTs with 14 eligible comparisons. The combination of dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine was compared with placebo in three RCTs (173 participants), dexamethasone in seven (569 participants), and dexmedetomidine in four (281 participants). The duration of analgesia was likely increased with the combination versus placebo (mean difference 460 min, 95% CI 249 to 671) and versus dexmedetomidine (mean difference 388 min, 95% CI 211 to 565). The duration was likely similar with the combination versus dexamethasone (mean difference 50 min, 95% CI -140 to 239). The certainty of the evidence was moderate because most trials were at high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine likely increased the duration of analgesia when compared with placebo and dexmedetomidine. The combination likely provided a similar duration of analgesia as dexamethasone. Based on this systematic review, it seems reasonable to use dexamethasone as the sole adjunct if the goal is to increase the duration of analgesia.

Local anaesthetic adjuncts for peripheral nerve blockade

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Moderate-to-severe pain is common and remains a significant problem. Compared with opioid analgesia alone, single-shot peripheral nerve blockade has been associated with improved pain relief and the potential of decreased side effects. Single-shot nerve blockade, however, is limited by its relatively short duration of action. In this review, we aim to summarize the evidence related to local anaesthetic adjuncts for peripheral nerve blockade.

RECENT FINDINGS

Dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine exhibit characteristics that most closely resemble the ideal local anaesthetic adjunct. In upper limb block, dexamethasone has been demonstrated to be superior to dexmedetomidine regardless of administration route for the duration of sensory and motor blockade as well as the duration of analgesia. No clinically significant differences between intravenous and perineural dexamethasone were found. Perineural and intravenous dexamethasone have the potential to prolong sensory blockade to a greater extent than motor blockade. The evidence indicates that the mechanism of action of perineural dexamethasone in upper limb block is systemic in nature. Unlike perineural dexmedetomidine, intravenous dexmedetomidine has not been shown to result in differences in the characteristics of regional blockade compared with local anaesthetic alone.

SUMMARY

Intravenous dexamethasone is the local anaesthetic adjunct of choice, increasing the duration of sensory and motor blockade as well as the duration of analgesia by 477, 289 and 478 min, respectively. In view of this, we recommend consideration of the intravenous administration of dexamethasone at a dose of 0.1-0.2 mg/kg for all patients undergoing surgery whatever the level of postoperative pain, mild, moderate or severe. Further research should focus on the potential synergism of action between intravenous dexamethasone and perineural dexmedetomidine.