Attenuation of haemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation with dexmedetomidine: A comparison between intravenous and intranasal route

Comparative evaluation of nebulized versus intravenous dexmedetomidine on intubating conditions during awake fiberoptic nasotracheal intubation

BACKGROUND

There is a search for an ideal agent to facilitate awake fiberoptic intubation (AFOI). Dexmedetomidine is a selective α2 agonist which can be administered through intravenous, intramuscular, buccal, intranasal & inhalational routes. It provides good intubation conditions without oxygen desaturation but may cause hypotension and bradycardia when administered intravenously. Hence, alternative routes of administering dexmedetomidine which may improve its safety profile are worth exploring.

METHODS

In this randomised, controlled, double-blind trial, 46 ASA I/II adult participants scheduled for elective ENT surgery were randomly allocated to Group ND (Nebulised Dexmedetomidine) (n = 23) to receive nebulisation with dexmedetomidine 1μg.kg-1 and Group ID (Intravenous Dexmedetomidine) (n = 23) to receive intravenous dexmedetomidine 1μg.kg-1 before AFOI. All the patients received injection midazolam 1 mg i.v. as premedication before anaesthesia was initiated. The primary outcome was the cough score. The secondary outcomes were the RSS, SAYGO boluses, post-intubation score, hemodynamic parameters, recall of the procedure, patient satisfaction score and any side effects.

RESULTS

The cough score was significantly lower in nebulized group (2.43 ± 0.992 vs 3.52 ± 1.082) with p = 0.001. RSS(3.30 ± 0.926 vs 4.22 ± 1.126; p = 0.004), number of SAYGO boluses required (2.74 ± 0.864 vs 3.57 ± 1.161; p = 0.009) & the post intubation score (1.48 ± 0.593 vs 2.17 ± 0.778; p = 0.001) were also significantly lower in nebulized group.

CONCLUSIONS

Nebulisation with dexmedetomidine results in desirable degree of sedation and better tolerance of the procedure with adequate attenuation of the haemodynamic responses to intubation.

Premedication with intranasal versus intravenous dexmedetomidine for hypotensive anesthesia during functional endoscopic sinus surgery in adults: A randomized triple-blind trial

Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery (FESS) has been performed under controlled hypotension to increase operating field visibility. Intranasal (IN) dexmedetomidine is easy, noninvasive, and possesses lower C max, accompanied by lower pharmacodynamic action, including hypotension, bradycardia, and sedation. This trial aimed to compare IN and intravenous (IV) dexmedetomidine for hypotensive anesthesia during FESS. This randomized, controlled, triple-blinded clinical trial involved sixty cases scheduled for FESS. Patients were divided into two equal groups by random manner. 45-60 min before anesthesia induction, group IN: received 1 μg/kg IN dexmedetomidine diluted in 10 ml of saline 0.9 % intranasally preoperative. Group IV: received 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine diluted in 10 ml of saline 0.9 % infused over 10 min. The primary outcome was the total amount of administered atropine. The secondary outcomes included hemodynamic, through 1 h before surgery, intraoperatively and postoperatively at different time intervals. The quality of the operative field, sedation, adverse reactions and hemostatic stuffing after FESS were also assessed. The total amount of consumed atropine decreased significantly in group IN compared to group IV. Preoperative Ramsay Sedation scores at T0, T5, T50 and T60 were comparable between the two groups, while at T10, T15, T20, T30, and T40 were lower significantly in the IN group compared with the IV group. Preoperative mean arterial blood pressure at T0, T5 and T60 had comparable differences across both groups while reduced at T10 to T 45 significantly in the IV group than IN group. Both groups had comparable satisfaction, postoperative Ramsey sedation, hemostatic suffering, quality of operative field and complications. In conclusion, IN dexmedetomidine administration is relatively simple and appropriate; moreover, it decreases first-pass metabolism. Onset is prolonged relative to IV dosing; thus, it should be administered nearly 1 h before surgery and recommended in adult patients as they require minor sedation preoperatively.

Nebulized Versus Intravenously Administered Dexmedetomidine for Obtunding Hemodynamic Responses to Laryngoscopy and Tracheal Intubation: A Randomized Double-Blind Comparative Study

Introduction Intravenous dexmedetomidine is known to cause major adverse effects such as bradycardia, hypotension, cardiac arrhythmias, and heart block when used as premedication for attenuation of the laryngoscopy and intubation response, limiting its routine use. Thus, it is important to study other routes of administration of dexmedetomidine. Objectives To compare the hemodynamic response and sedation score between intravenous and nebulized dexmedetomidine as premedication for the attenuation of the laryngoscopy and intubation response. Materials and methods In this study, 60 patients fulfilling inclusion criteria undergoing surgeries under general anesthesia (ASA Grade I and II) were randomly allocated into two groups of 30 patients each. Group IV received intravenous 1 mcg/kg dexmedetomidine in 100 mL normal saline, and Group IN received nebulization with 1 mcg/kg dexmedetomidine diluted to a total volume of 5 cc of normal saline, 30 minutes prior to the induction of general anesthesia. Sedation scores were calculated using the Ramsay sedation score at 20 minutes after the administration of the drug; patients were induced by the standard protocol, and laryngoscopy was performed. Vitals were recorded before the administration of the drug and after intubation at stipulated time intervals. Results The median heart rate becomes significantly lower at 15 minutes (70 vs. 76.5) and 20 minutes (66 vs. 76) after induction among Group IV as compared to Group IN. The median systolic blood pressure was significantly lower at 20 minutes in Group IV (110 mmHg) than in Group IN (119 mmHg). The median diastolic blood pressure was significantly lower at 10 minutes (76 vs. 79), 15 minutes (70 vs. 77), and 20 minutes (69 vs. 78.5) in Group IV than in Group IN. The median of mean arterial pressure was significantly lower at 15 minutes (84.8 vs. 91.5) and 20 minutes (83 vs. 92) in Group IV than in Group IN. A comparison of vitals after induction shows that the median heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure were significantly lower statistically among Group IV as compared to Group IN at 0, 1, 3, 5, 10, 15, and 30 minutes after induction (except for systolic blood pressure at 3 minutes). The median sedation score was lower in Group IN (0) than in Group IV (1); this difference is statistically significant. Conclusion The obtundation of hemodynamic responses following laryngoscopy and maintaining hemodynamics intraoperatively is statistically better with nebulized dexmedetomidine compared to intravenous dexmedetomidine.

A prospective-randomized placebo-controlled trial comparing the effects of nebulized dexmedetomidine v/s dexmedetomidine-lignocaine mixture on intraoperative hemodynamics and surgical field quality in patients undergoing endoscopic transnasal transsphenoidal pituitary tumor surgery

Background

During transnasal transsphenoidal pituitary surgery (TNTSS), the primary objective is to maintain stable hemodynamics while ensuring ideal surgical conditions. This study aimed to investigate the effect of nebulized dexmedetomidine on hemodynamic parameters and the quality of the surgical field during TNTSS.

Methods

Seventy-five patients scheduled for TNTSS were randomized into three groups of 25 each and received preoperative nebulization with 5 mL of nebulizing fluid consisting of 1.5 μg/kg of dexmedetomidine with saline in dexmedetomidine (D) group; 1.5 μg/kg of dexmedetomidine with 2% lignocaine in dexmedetomidine-lignocaine (DL) group and normal saline in the control (S) group. Heart rate (HR), mean blood pressure, Formmers score, anesthetic requirement, and emergence were evaluated for each group.

Results

Group S had significantly higher HR and mean arterial pressure than the other two groups across various time points during surgery (P < 0.01). The total requirements for fentanyl, propofol, sevoflurane, and labetalol and the incidence of delayed emergence were significantly higher in the S group compared to the other two groups (P < 0.01). The D and DL groups exhibited significantly better surgical field conditions than the S group. In all the parameters assessed, patients in the D group outperformed those in the DL group.

Conclusion

The administration of nebulized dexmedetomidine, both alone and in combination with lignocaine, resulted in stable hemodynamics, favorable operative conditions, reduced anesthetic requirement, and facilitated prompt emergence during TNTSS. Nebulized dexmedetomidine proved superior to its combination with lignocaine across all evaluated parameters.

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.

Nebulised fentanyl, dexmedetomidine and magnesium sulphate for attenuation of haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation: A double-blinded, randomised comparative study

Background and Aims

Direct laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation cause an increase in heart rate (HR) and blood pressure, called as pressor response. This study aimed to compare nebulised forms of fentanyl, dexmedetomidine and magnesium sulphate to attenuate the haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation.

Methods

This double-blinded, randomised study was conducted on 90 patients undergoing elective surgery requiring endotracheal intubation. Nebulisation was done with fentanyl 1 μg/kg (Group A), dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg (Group B) and magnesium sulphate (MgSO4) (40 mg/kg) (Group C). Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP) and HR were recorded before nebulisation (T0), post-nebulisation (T1) and at 2, 5 and 10 min after intubation (T2, T3, T4). The statistical analysis for comparing continuous variables between the groups was performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), and a P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Compared to T0, an increase in HR at T2 and T3 was seen in Group A only, which reached baseline values at T4 (P values <0.0001 and 0.037, respectively). No HR value was higher than the baseline readings in groups B and C. The decreasing trend of SBP, DBP and MAP was seen in all three groups. Groups B and C had a statistically significant decrease in all the values from baseline (P values <0.0001).

Conclusion

Nebulised form of dexmedetomidine (1 μg/kg) and magnesium (40 mg/kg) seems to be superior to fentanyl (1 μg/kg) in blunting the stress response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation.

Comparative evaluation of lignocaine nebulization with and without dexmedetomidine for flexible videoendoscopic guided awake nasal intubation for general anaesthesia

Background and Aims

Awake fibreoptic intubation is considered a safe approach in airway management of a patient with difficult airway. Awake fibreoptic endoscopy needs appropriate anaesthesia of airway to suppress airway reflexes and prevent discomfort. We planned this study to evaluate effect of adding dexmedetomidine to lignocaine nebulization on conditions for awake videoendoscopic intubation.

Material and Methods

In this prospective randomized double blind controlled study, ninety six ASA grade I, II patients of either gender, aged 18-65 years, scheduled for elective surgeries under general anaesthesia, were randomly allocated into two groups, Group D and L to receive nebulization with 4% Lignocaine 5 ml + Dexmedetomidine 2 mcg/kg and 4% Lignocaine alone respectively, 20 min before procedure. Time taken to intubate the patient, ease of intubation assessed by cough severity score, patient comfort score, post-intubation patient satisfaction and hemodynamic changes were recorded and compared.

Results

Group D and L had comparable intubation time (196.8 ± 61.2 s) and (205.8 ± 52.2 s) (p = 0.437). Cough severity, patient comfort and quality of procedure with post intubation patient satisfaction score were significantly better in Group D. Haemodynamics parameters were better post nebulization in group D as compared to group L.

Conclusion

Addition of Dexmedetomidine 2 mcg/kg with 4% Lignocaine during nebulization improves intubating conditions during awake flexible videoendoscopy in terms of ease of intubation, cough severity, patients comfort and satisfaction along with providing stable Haemodynamics profile.

A Comparative Study Between Intranasal and Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Hemodynamic Responses During Endotracheal Intubation

INTRODUCTION

 Tracheal intubation and laryngoscopy may cause sympathetic stimulation, which can cause tachycardia and hypertension. To abolish the pressor response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation, many medication combinations have been tried with varying degrees of efficacy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This randomized comparative study was double-blinded and included 106 subjects. Patients including those aged 18-60 belong to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) 1 and 2. These subjects were divided into two study groups. Group A received dexmedetomidine 0.5mcg/kg (200mcg diluted in 50ml syringe with normal saline (NS) up to 50cc 4mcg/ml) through an infusion pump over 40min before induction. Group B received dexmedetomidine intranasally (1mcg/kg) in undiluted which is prepared from parental preparation (100mcg/ml) and an equivalent dose of NS to the other group. The intranasal drug was dripped into both nostrils in equal volume using a 1ml syringe in a supine head-down position about 40min before induction. Both groups received an intravenous placebo and an intranasal placebo with normal saline.

RESULTS

In our study, intranasal and intravenous groups were compared. There was no statistically significant difference in hemodynamic variables like heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) between the two groups (majority p value >0.05). Hence both routes can be preferred for attenuation of pressor responses.

CONCLUSION

 Study findings demonstrate dexmedetomidine can be utilized as a premedication to lessen hemodynamic surges during endotracheal intubation with more or less the same efficacy via intranasal and intravenous routes. This result could be attributable to the fact that both intravenous and intranasal dexmedetomidine stop central catecholamine levels from rising.

Comparison of Intravenous Versus Nebulized Dexmedetomidine for Laryngoscopy and Intubation-Induced Sympathoadrenal Stress Response Attenuation

Background

Nebulized dexmedetomidine has been used for procedural sedation and allaying separation anxiety in children. Literature regarding its use in the attenuation of laryngoscopy and intubation response via the nebulized route is scarce. We evaluated preoperative dexmedetomidine nebulization on the hemodynamic response arising from laryngoscopy/intubation, hemodynamics, analgesic consumption, and postoperative sore throat.

Objectives

The primary objective was to evaluate/compare the hemodynamic effects of preoperative intravenous and nebulized dexmedetomidine on laryngoscopy/intubation and compare the efficacy of the two routes in blunting the sympathoadrenal response. The secondary objective was to evaluate their effects on intraoperative analgesic consumption and incidence and sore throat postoperatively.

Methods

120 ASA I & II adult patients undergoing elective surgeries requiring tracheal intubation were randomized to receive intravenous dexmedetomidine (1 µg/kg over 10 minutes) and nebulized dexmedetomidine (1 µg/kg in 3 - 4 mL of 0.9% saline), 30 min before anesthesia induction. Heart rate and non-invasive blood pressure were monitored for 10 min following laryngoscopy and then throughout the surgery. Intraoperative analgesic consumption, postoperative sore throat, and recovery from anesthesia were assessed.

Results

No significant hemodynamic difference was found between the two groups till three minutes. Then, the difference turned significant owing to a greater fall in the heart rate and mean arterial pressure in the intravenous group. Nebulized dexmedetomidine exhibited a lesser tendency of hypo/hypertension and brady/tachycardia, while hemodynamics was more stable. There was lesser sore throat and sedation in the nebulized group. Intraoperative analgesic and propofol consumption was comparable between the two groups.

Conclusions

Nebulized dexmedetomidine attenuated laryngoscopy and intubation response, although to a lesser extent than the intravenous group in equivalent doses. However, the nebulized route provided greater hemodynamic stability in the intraoperative period and lesser sedation/sore throat postoperatively without an increase in adverse effects. Nebulized dexmedetomidine may provide a more holistic and viable alternative in patients who poorly tolerate hypotension, bradycardia, and sedation.

A Comparative Study between Local Dexmedetomidine and Intravenous Dexmedetomidine during Awake Fiberoptic Nasotracheal Intubation

Background

Awake fiberoptic intubation (AFOI) is the gold standard for managing a difficult airway. To make the patient comfortable and cooperative during the procedure, many drugs such as benzodiazepines, opioids, or dexmedetomidine are used. Most of these intravenously given drugs may cause respiratory depression and hypoxia.

Aim

We compared the efficacy of dexmedetomidine through nebulization and transtracheal route with intravenous routes with the primary aim of comparing patient tolerance score (PTS) and secondary objectives of comparing sedation score, cough score, and total duration required for awake fiberoptic nasotracheal intubation.

Settings and Design

This study was a prospective randomized double-blind study.

Subjects and Methods

Seventy-six patients, scheduled for elective surgery requiring AFOI between 18 and 75 years, were included in the study. They were randomly divided into two groups of 38 each. Group I patients received intravenous dexmedetomidine 1 μg.kg-1 and Group L patients received local dexmedetomidine through nebulization 0.5 μg.kg-1 and transtracheal injection 0.5 μg.kg-1.

Statistical Analysis Used

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 22 was used.

Results

Patients who received dexmedetomidine through nebulization and transtracheal route have significantly better PTSs and less cough scores as compared to patients who received dexmedetomidine by intravenous route (P < 0.05). Hemodynamic parameters and sedation scores between the two groups were statistically insignificant (P > 0.05). The time required for the procedure was significantly less in Group L compared to Group I (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Dexmedetomidine by nebulization and transtracheal route provides optimal conditions for AFOI with good patient tolerance and less cough score as compared to the intravenous route.

Evaluation of Nebulised Dexmedetomidine Given Pre-operatively to Attenuate Hemodynamic Response to Laryngoscopy and Endotracheal Intubation: A Randomised Control Trial

Background and aim

A variety of medications have been studied to reduce the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation. Dexmedetomidine has been used intravenously in many studies to reduce the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation. In high-risk patients, this pressor response can increase morbidity and mortality. As dexmedetomidine has a good bioavailability via the nebulisation route, we formulated this study to evaluate the effect of nebulised dexmedetomidine on the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation.

Methods

This is a prospective, randomised controlled trial conducted on 100 patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologists grade I and II. The primary objective of the study was to see if nebulised dexmedetomidine at a dose of 1 microgram/kg could reduce the stress reaction to laryngoscopy and intubation. The secondary objective was to study the dose sparing effect of nebulised dexmedetomidine on the amount of propofol used during induction of general anaesthesia. The study population was randomly divided into two groups: group A (n = 50) included patients nebulised with dexmedetomidine 1 microgram/kg and group B (n = 50) included patients nebulised with 5 ml saline 30 minutes before induction of anaesthesia in a sitting position.

Results

The demographics were similar in both groups. Following laryngoscopy and intubation, the systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate showed a significant increase in the control group B as compared to the treatment group A. In group A, there was attenuation in SBP (one minute = 113.2 ± 14.503, P < 0.001; five minutes = 109.86 ± 8.342, P < 0.001; 10 minutes = 114.24 ± 7.797, P = 0.010), DBP (one minute = 73.72 ± 10.986, P = 0.011; five minutes = 71.62 ± 9.934, P = 0.005; 10 minutes = 76.1 ± 8.006, P = 0.009), MAP (one minute = 86.80 ± 11.86, P = 0.001; five minutes = 84.44 ± 8.97, P = 0.006; 10 minutes = 88.72 ± 7.44, P = 0.018), and heart rate (one minute = 83.34 ± 12.325, P = 0.001; five minutes = 81.56 ± 13.33, P = 0.003; 10 minutes = 80.16 ± 14.086, P = 0.013) following laryngoscopy and intubation. Induction dose of propofol was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group (73 ± 19.509, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Nebulised dexmedetomidine effectively blunts the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation and also has a dose sparing effect on the induction dose of propofol.

Comparison of the stress response and intubating performance in endotracheal intubation with Macintosh and McCoy laryngoscopes

Introduction: Laryngoscopy and intubation cause stress response and sympathetic stimulation within the body. Attenuation of these changes by pharmacological means and improved technique with modified instruments is of absolute importance, for stable hemodynamics of the patients. Aim: Comparison of stress response to laryngoscopy and intubation, Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) using Macintosh and McCoy laryngoscopes. Material and methods: After obtaining institutional ethical committee approval and patient consent in this randomized study, sixty patients of ASA grade I and II, posted for elective surgery under general anaesthesia were intubated with Macintosh or McCoy laryngoscopes. Changes in heart rate, mean arterial pressure, systolic and diastolic blood pressure were observed upto 15 minutes after laryngoscopy, along with IDS. Results: McCoy group when compared with Macintosh group had significant reduction in heart rate at T0 (p value <0.0001), systolic blood pressure at T0, T1 and T15 (p value < 0.001), diastolic blood pressure at T0, T10 and T15 (p value <0.05), mean arterial blood pressure at T0, T10 and T15 (p value <0.05) was observed in this study. Conclusion: Hemodynamic stress response with McCoy blade laryngoscope was reduced in magnitude in comparison with Macintosh blade laryngoscope.

Evaluation of nebulised dexmedetomidine in blunting haemodynamic response to intubation: A prospective randomised study

Background and Aim:

The process of laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation is associated with intense sympathetic activity, which may precipitate intra-operative complications. Taking the advantage of dexmedetomidine's good bioavailability and rapid absorption through nasal mucosa; we contemplated this study to evaluate the effects of nebulised dexmedetomidine as a premedication in blunting the haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation.

Methods:

This prospective, randomised, comparative study was conducted in 100 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I, II patients. The primary outcome was to evaluate the effects of dexmedetomidine nebulisation in blunting the stress response to laryngoscopy and intubation. The secondary outcome was to study its adverse effects. The study population was divided randomly into two groups. Control group C (n = 50) received nebulisation with 5 ml of normal saline and group D (n = 50) received 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine 5 ml 10 min before induction in sitting position.

Results:

Demographics were comparable. Following laryngoscopy and intubation, systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP), response entropy (RE) and state entropy (SE) were markedly increased in the control group whereas in group D there was a fall in SBP (at 1 min-126.64 ± 26.37; P 0.01, 5 min-109.50 ± 16.83; P 0.02, 10 min-106.94 ± 17.01; P 0.03), DBP (at 1 min-83.18 ± 17.89; P 0.001, 5 min-66.40 ± 13.88; P 0.001, 10 min- 62.56 ± 14.91; P 0.01) and MAP (at 1 min-99.68 ± 19.22; P 0.001, 5 min- 84.08 ± 13.66; P 0.003, 10 min- 81.74 ± 14.79; P 0.008), RE and SE which was statistically significant (P 0.002). There was a dose sparing effect of propofol in group D; sedation score was comparable.

Conclusion:

Nebulised dexmedetomidine effectively blunts the stress response to laryngoscopy and intubation with no adverse effects.

Does a Nasal Airway Facilitate Nasotracheal Intubation or Not? A Prospective, Randomized, and Controlled Study

PURPOSE

Nasotracheal intubation (NTI) is generally preferred for maxillofacial surgery to provide a more suitable and wide surgery area for the surgeons. The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether using a nasal airway just before the NTI may facilitate NTI or not.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, and controlled study was performed on patients who were admitted to our hospital for maxillofacial surgery. In group 1, a nasal airway was used just before the NTI during mask ventilation, and patients in the group were ventilated without nasal airway. Airway group was the primary predictor of the study. The NTI duration was the primary outcome variable, and the number of attempts was the secondary outcome variable. Difficulty of ventilation and complications were the other variables that were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 70 patients were included in the study and divided into 2 groups. There was no statistically significant relationship between the duration of NTI and other variables, but the significance value for sternomental distance, ventilation difficulty, and epistaxis was P < .10. The NTI duration (the primary outcome variable) and the number of attempts (the secondary outcome variable) are statistically lower in the nasal airway group (group 1) than the control group (group 2). Ventilation difficulty was significantly higher in group 2 when compared with group 1 (P = .04). The model and regression coefficients for both variables are statistically significant in terms of duration of NTI and number of attempt values that they were lower in nasal airway group than the control group. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of complications (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study has shown that inserting a nasal airway into the nostril just before the NTI may facilitate the intubation process by preparing the nasal passage.

Comparative evaluation of oral melatonin and oral clonidine for the attenuation of haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation-A prospective randomised double blind study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation cause significant derangement of the haemodynamic parameters proving detrimental for some patients. Clonidine, an α-2 adrenoreceptor agonist, and melatonin, the pineal hormone, have been used for the attenuation of these haemodynamic responses. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of oral melatonin and clonidine in attenuating the haemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and intubation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective randomised double-blind study, 60 American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade I and II patients aged 20-60 years of either gender scheduled to undergo elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomly divided into Group M and Group C and orally received 6 mg of melatonin and 0.2 mg of clonidine, respectively, 120 min before the induction of anaesthesia. The haemodynamic parameters-heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure and rate -pressure product(RPP) were recorded before and 120 min after the administration of the study drug, before induction, immediately after intubation and at 1, 3, 5 and 10 min following intubation. Sedation was assessed using the Ramsay Sedation Scale. The qualitative and quantitative variables were analysed using Chi square test and unpaired student t test, respectively. For intragroup comparison of quantitative data, paired t test was applied. A P value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

RESULTS

A significant difference was noted between the groups regarding HR and RPP 0, 1, 3 and 5 min after intubation. The Ramsay sedation score ranged between 2 and 3 at all time intervals.

CONCLUSION

Although both the drugs are effective, oral melatonin proved superior to oral clonidine in attenuating the haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation without any side effects.

The clinical effect of dexmedetomidine combined with parecoxib sodium on sedation, antianxiety and prevention of intubation stress in patients undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery: a randomised controlled trial

Background

To investigate the effect of intravenous injection of dexmedetomidine combined with parecoxib sodium on sedation and anxiety and stress response of tracheal intubation in patients undergoing functional endoscopic sinus surgery.

Methods

One hundred twenty patients undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery were randomly divided into four groups: group DP, group D, group P and group N. The blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), blood oxygen saturation (SPO2), EEG, bispectral index (BIS), Ramsay sedation score and state anxiety questionnaire (SAI) were recorded before administration (T0), 10 min (T1), 20 min (T2) and 30 min (T3) after administration. After 30 min, endotracheal intubation was performed after anesthesia induction. The BP, HR, SPO2 were recorded 1 min before intubation (T4), intubation (T5), 3 min (T6) after intubation, 5 min (T7) after intubation, and blood samples were collected from patients before administration and after intubation 2 min to detect serum cortisol (Cor), adrenalin (E) norepinephrine (NE) and blood glucose (BS).

Results

There was no significant difference in Ramsay sedation score before anesthesia, but the Ramsay sedation score in group D、DP was significantly higher than that in group P and group N, the BIS, BP, HR and anxiety scores were significantly lower than those in the group P and group N (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in Ramsay sedation score, BIS value, anxiety score and BP, HR between group D and group DP (p > 0.05). Compared with T4, there was no significant difference in BIS and BP, HR in group D, group DP and group P (p > 0.05), but the BIS, BP and HR in group N were significantly higher than T4, (p < 0.05). Three minutes after intubation there was no statistical difference in the changes of Cor, E, NE and BS values compared with before intubation in group P and group DP (p > 0.05), but the changes of Cor, E, NE and BS values were significantly lower than that in group N (p < 0.05). Compared with T0, the values of NE, E, Cor, BS decreased in group D, DP and P at T4, group DP decreased more significantly than group D (p < 0.05). while the NE, E, Cor, BS of T6 are at the same level as the base value. In group N, the NE, E, Cor, BS of T4 were at the same level of T0, but significantly higher at T6.And at T6, NE and E in group D, P and N were significantly different from those in group DP (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Preoperative intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine combined with parecoxib sodium by functional nasal endoscopy can not only calm and resist anxiety, but also better prevent stress response of endotracheal intubation, which is a safe and effective way of preoperative medication.

Trial registration

ChiCTR-OPN-17010444. Prospectively registered on 16 January 2017.

Effect of preoperative dexmedetomidine nebulization on the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation: a randomized control trial

Background

Dexmedetomidine, an alpha-2 agonist, has been used for attenuation of hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy but not through the nebulized route. We evaluated the effects of preoperative dexmedetomidine nebulization on the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation and examined the intraoperative anesthetic-analgesic requirements and recovery outcomes.

Methods

Overall, 120 American Society of Anesthesiologists I & II adult patients (of either gender) undergoing elective surgeries and requiring tracheal intubation, were randomized to receive nebulized dexmedetomidine (1 µg/kg in 3–4 ml of 0.9% saline) or 0.9% saline (3–4 ml), 30 min before anesthesia induction. Heart rate (HR) and non-invasive systolic blood pressure (SBP) were monitored for 10 min following laryngoscopy.

Results

After laryngoscopy, linear mixed effect modelling showed significantly lower trend of increase in HR in the dexmedetomidine group versus saline (P = 0.012); however, there was no difference in the SBP changes between the two groups (P = 0.904). Induction dose of propofol (P < 0.001), intraoperative fentanyl consumption (P = 0.007), and isoflurane requirements (P = 0.013) were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group. There was no difference in the 2 h incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (P = 0.612) or sore-throat (P = 0.741).

Conclusions

Nebulized dexmedetomidine at 1 µg/kg attenuated the increase in HR but not SBP following laryngoscopy and reduced the intraoperative anesthetic and analgesic consumption. There was no effect on early PONV, sore-throat, or increase in incidence of adverse effects. Nebulized dexmedetomidine may represent a favorable alternative to the intravenous route in short duration surgeries.