Why the study?
Does labetalol improve quality of surgical field visualization compared to glyceryl trinitrate in patients undergoing spine surgery?
Does labetalol improve quality of surgical field visualization compared to glyceryl trinitrate in patients undergoing spine surgery?
Labetalol is more effective than glyceryl trinitrate for improving surgical field visualization by reducing blood loss during spine surgery.
Clinicians may prefer labetalol for surgical field optimization in spine cases; confirms RCT advantage over glyceryl trinitrate.
Background: Induced hypotension is used to reduce blood loss especially in those operations where even a small amount of blood can obscure the operative field such as spine surgery. Objectives: To compare the effect of labetalol with that of glyceryl trinitrate to reduce intraoperative blood loss by inducing elective hypotension without any tachycardia and to improve quality of surgical field during spine surgery. Method: A total number of thirty patients (ASA grade I & II) were selected randomly into two groups, fifteen in each group. Group-I received glyceryl tinitrate (1000?g) and Group-II received labetalol (5mg) intravenously 3 minutes before induction of anaesthesia. Heart rate, mean arterial pressure was observed in two study groups 15 minutes interval in intra-operative period and quality of surgical field was detected by 4 points VRS (Verbal rating scale) after completion of surgery by asking the surgeon. Results: Heart rate varied significantly in two study groups after induction of anaesthesia except baseline and pre induction (p< 0.05). Labetalol associated with improved quality of surgical field visualization than glyceryltrinitrate (p = 0.034). Conclusion: Our study concluded that labetalol is effective than glyceryltrinitrate to reduce blood loss in spine surgery. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/jbsa.v22i2.18141 Journal of BSA, 2009; 22(2): 48-53
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yeasmeen et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: