A comparison of risk of hypotension using standard doses of remifentanil versus dexmedetomidine infusions in adult patients undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia at the Aga Khan University Hospital, Nairobi

Adoption of Dexmedetomidine in Different Doses at Different Timing in Perioperative Patients

Dexmedetomidine (Dex) is an alpha-2 agonist used for sedation during various procedures. Dex activates 2-adrenoceptors, and causes the decrease of sympathetic tone, with attenuation of the neuroendocrine and hemodynamic responses to anesthesia and surgery; it reduces anesthetic and opioid requirements; and causes sedation and analgesia.

OBJECTIVE

it was to compare the perioperative effects of different doses of Dex at different timing in patients using Dex during the perioperative period adopting a medical data classification algorithm based on optimized semi-supervised collaborative training (Tri-training).

METHODS

495 patients requiring surgical treatment in Xingtai People's Hospital were randomly selected as the study subjects. The patients were divided into group A (used before induction), group B (used during induction), and group C (used after induction) according to different induction timing, with 165 cases in each group. Then, groups A, B, and C were divided into groups A1, B1, and C1 (0.4 μg/(kg·h) rate), groups A2, B2, and C2 (0.6 μg/(kg·h) rate), and groups A3, B3, and C3 (0.8 μg/(kg·h) rate) according to the dose used, with 55 cases in each group. Intraoperative anesthesia and postoperative adverse reactions were compared among the 9 groups.

RESULTS

the similarity between the Tri-training algorithm optimized by Naive Bayes (NB) classification algorithm and the actual classification (93.49%) was clearly higher than that by decision tree (DT) and K-nearest neighbor (kNN) classification algorithm (76.21%, 74.31%); heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) values decreased obviously after Dex used in groups B1, C1, B2, C2, B3, and C3 (P <0.05), but did not change significantly in groups A1, A2, and A3 (P >0.05); the proportion of patients with satisfactory Ramsay score in group A3 was distinctly superior than that in groups A1, A2, B1, B2, B3, C1, C2, and C3 (P <0.05); the incidence of adverse reactions in group A3 was significantly inferior than that in groups A1, A2, B1, B2, B3, C1, C2, and C3 (P <0.05).

CONCLUSION

the optimization effect of NB classification algorithm was the best, and the injection of Dex at the injection rate of 0.8 μg/(kg·h) before induction of anesthesia could apparently improve the fluctuation of HR, SBP, and DBP during perioperative period, and effectively reduce the occurrence of adverse reactions in patients, with better sedative effect on patients.

Dexmedetomidine Compared to Remifentanil Infusion as Adjuvant to Sevoflurane Anesthesia during Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Objectives

Evaluation of postoperative (PO) analgesic effects of intraoperative (IO) Dexmedetomidine (DEX) compared to remifentanil (REMI) infusions during sevoflurane anesthesia for laparoscopic gastric sleeve surgery.

Patients and Methods

One hundred and thirty-two patients with body mass index >35 kg.m^-2 and ASA Grades II or III were randomly divided into group R received REMI infusion (6-18 μg.kg^-1.h^-1) and Group D received DEX infusion (0.2-0.5 μg.kg^-1.h^-1) after tracheal intubation till before stoppage of inhalational anesthetic. Heart rate and mean arterial pressure were noninvasively monitored during and after surgery. Emergence time, time until postanesthetic care unit transfer, and total operating room (OR) time was recorded. PO shoulder-tip pain and wound pain scores were recorded and rescue analgesia was provided as 50 mg pethidine intramuscular injection. Occurrence of PO nausea and vomiting (PONV) and frequency of the need for antiemetic therapy were recorded. Primary study outcome was the ability of the study infusions to reduce consumption of PO pethidine down to one dose during 24-hr PO.

Results

IO use of REMI or DEX infusion allowed hemodynamic control to surgical stresses with nonsignificant difference between both infusions. REMI infusion insured significantly rapid recovery and short OR times but required larger volume of sevoflurane during surgery and proper PO follow-up for pain and PONV. DEX infusion significantly improved control of PO pain with a larger number of patient requested rescue analgesia only once, reduced the dose of PO analgesia, reduced the frequency of PONV, and the need for antiemetic therapy.

Conclusion

REMI or DEX infusion as IO adjuvant to general anesthesia is appropriate option to achieve hemodynamic control of surgical stresses and to improve perioperative outcomes. REMI infusion may be preferred for its induced rapid recovery and short OR time, whereas DEX infusion may be chosen for its improved control of PO pain and reduction of PO analgesia and frequency of PONV.