Background The present study aimed to investigate whether intratracheal dexmedetomidine combined with ropivacaine reduces the severity and incidence of postoperative sore throat after tracheal intubation under general anaesthesia. Methods Two hundred patients with American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status I-II who were subjected to general anaesthesia were randomly divided into four groups, namely, Group D, Group R, Group DR and Group S; these groups received intratracheal dexmedetomidine (1 µg/kg), 0.8% ropivacaine (40 mg), dexmedetomidine (1 µg/kg) combined with 0.8% ropivacaine (40 mg) and normal saline before endotracheal intubation, respectively. The primary outcomes were the incidence and grade of sore throat and hoarseness at 2 h and 24 h after surgery. Moreover, the modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale results were recorded at each time point. The secondary outcomes were intraoperative haemodynamic fluctuations, intraoperative anaesthetic drug requirements, and adverse reactions during and after surgery. The patients’ vital signs before induction, before superficial anaesthesia, after superficial anaesthesia, before intubation, after intubation, and 1 min after intubation were recorded. The use of anaesthetic drugs and occurrence of adverse effects were also recorded. Results The incidence and severity of sore throat were significantly lower in Group DR than in the other three groups 2 h after the operation, but they were only significantly lower in Group DR than in the control group 24 h after the operation. Moreover, compared with Group S and Group D, Group DR exhibited more stable haemodynamics during intubation. The doses of remifentanil and propofol were significantly lower in Group DR than in the other groups. Conclusion The combined use of dexmedetomidine and ropivacaine for surface anaesthesia before intubation significantly reduced the incidence and severity of postoperative sore throat. This treatment also decreased anaesthetic drug requirements and intraoperative haemodynamic fluctuations and caused no adverse effects. Trial registration This clinical research was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1900022907, Registration date 30/04/2019).
BACKGROUND: Intravenous dexmedetomidine has been reported to decrease the occurrence of postoperative delirium (POD) in elderly patients. Nevertheless, some previous studies have indicated that intratracheal dexmedetomidine and intranasal dexmedetomidine are also effective and convenient. The current study aimed to compare the effect of different administration routes of dexmedetomidine on POD in elderly patients. METHODS: We randomly allocated 150 patients (aged 60 years or more) scheduled for spinal surgery to receive intravenous dexmedetomidine (0.6 μg/kg), intranasal dexmedetomidine (1 μg/kg) before anesthesia induction, or intratracheal dexmedetomidine (0.6 µg/kg) after anesthesia induction. The primary outcome was the frequency of delirium during the first 3 postoperative days. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative sore throat (POST) and sleep quality. Adverse events were recorded, and routine treatment was performed. RESULTS: Compared with the intranasal group, the intravenous group had a significantly lower occurrence of POD within 3 days (3 of 49 [6.1%] vs 14 of 50 [28.0%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 0.05–0.63; P < .017). Meanwhile, patients in the intratracheal group had a lower incidence of POD than those in the intranasal group (5 of 49 [10.2%] vs 14 of 50 [28.0%]; OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.10–0.89; P < .017). Whereas, there was no difference between the intratracheal and intravenous groups (5 of 49 [10.2%] vs 3 of 49 [6.1%]; OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 0.40–7.73; P > .017). The rate of POST was lower in the intratracheal group than that in the other 2 groups at 2 hours after surgery (7 of 49 [14.3%] vs 12 of 49 [24.5%] vs 18 of 50 [36.0%], P < .017, respectively). Intravenous dexmedetomidine had the lowest Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index score on the second morning after surgery (median [interquartile range {IQR}]: 4 [3–5] vs 6 [4–7] vs 6 [4–7], P < .017, respectively). Compared with the intranasal group, the intravenous group had a higher rate of bradycardia and a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (P < .017). The intranasal group was associated with the highest incidence of hypertension (P < .017). CONCLUSIONS: For patients aged ≥60 years undergoing spinal surgery, compared with the intranasal route of dexmedetomidine, intravenous and intratracheal dexmedetomidine reduced the incidence of early POD. Meanwhile, intravenous dexmedetomidine was associated with better sleep quality after surgery, and intratracheal dexmedetomidine resulted in a lower incidence of POST. Adverse events were mild in all 3 administration routes of dexmedetomidine.
This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of chloroprocaine for activating labor analgesia and the optimal concentration compared to lidocaine. Patients and Methods: Ninety-six nulliparous parturients were randomly assigned to three groups: LD group, patients received the conventional initial dose of 6 mL of 1% lidocaine; CP1.5 group, patients received 6 mL of 1.5% chloroprocaine as the initial dose; and CP1.2 group, patients received 7.5 mL of 1.2% chloroprocaine as initial dose. Labor analgesia was maintained in all patients via a programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB). The primary outcome was the analgesia onset time. Secondary outcomes included the visual analog scale (VAS) scores, the interval and duration of uterine contractions during the first 12 contractions, failure to reach adequate analgesia, labor and neonatal outcomes, maternal satisfaction and adverse effects. Results: Parturients in the CP1.5 and CP1.2 groups achieved a shorter onset time than those in the LD group (hazard ratio (HR) = 6.540; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.503-12.210; P < 0.001 and HR = 3.460; 95% CI, 1.905-6.282; P < 0.001, respectively). The median time (95% CIs) to adequate analgesia was 12.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.