No abstract

BackgroundThe importance of decreasing bleeding in spine surgery is not only important to maintain the patient's hemodynamic balance but also allow a better view of the surgical field.ObjectivesThe current study aimed to compare dexmedetomidine and Esmolol™ as agents to induce hypotension in lumbar spine surgeries.Patients and MethodsA total of 50 patients aged 20 to 65 years belonging to the American society of anaesthesiologist (ASA) class I - II scheduled for decompression and fixation of the lumbar spine were included and divided into two groups namely, Group I, who received Esmolol and group II, who received dexmedetomidine, intravenously. The patients were compared for intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, estimated blood loss, operation time, intraoperative analgesic (fentanyl) consumption, and total fall in haemoglobin (Hb) during the perioperative period.ResultsThe study results showed that dexmedetomidine had lower (100.8 µg) fentanyl and sevoflurane consumption (1.2%), and less blood loss (278 mL) in comparison to the Esmolol group.ConclusionsBoth dexmedetomidine and Esmolol can be used as agents to control hypotension in patients undergoing lumbar spine decompression and fixation surgery; the dexmedetomidine group, however, was associated with better intraoperative hemodynamic stability and reduced intraoperative analgesic and volatile anaesthetic requirement.

Background: Addition of adjuvants to local anaesthetic in supraclavicular brachial plexus block helps in improving duration of block and analgesia. We compare clonidine and dexmedetomidine as adjuvants to ropivacaine in supraclavicular brachial plexus block.Method: A total of 75 patients aged from 20 to 60 years belonging to ASA I-II scheduled for upper limb surgery were included and divided into three groups-Group I received 0.5% ropivacaine plus normal saline, Group II received 0.5% ropivacaine plus clonidine and Group III received 0.5% ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine. The patients were compared for onset as well as duration of sensory and motor blockade, duration of analgesia and haemodynamic side effects. Results:The mean duration of sensory and motor block as well as analgesia was found to be more (statistically highly significant p<0.001) in group III (dexmedetomidine group) having a much longer duration of sensory and motor block as well as analgesia compared to group I (plain ropivacaine) and group II (clonidine group). Conclusion:Therefore, in present study it was found that addition of clonidine and dexmedetomidine to 0.5% ropivacaine are effective in supraclavicular brachial plexus block. However, dexmedetomidine is a better alternative to clonidine as adjuvant for 0.5% ropivacaine in to obtain early onset and prolong the duration of sensory and motor block and postoperative analgesia.

No abstract

No abstract