Key result
Combined low-dose dexmedetomidine and lidocaine cuts extubation tachycardia ~51% versus saline, matching dexmedetomidine alone.
Why the study?
Tracheal extubation carries hemodynamic side effects, prompting comparison of dexmedetomidine alone versus a low combination dose of dexmedetomidine plus lidocaine to attenuate the hemodynamic stress response.
Does a combined low dose of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine reduce hemodynamic stress response during endotracheal extubation in patients undergoing abdominal surgery?
RCT (n=150)
randomized
Does a combined low dose of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine reduce hemodynamic stress response during endotracheal extubation in patients undergoing abdominal surgery?
A low combined dose of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine is as effective as a standard dose of dexmedetomidine in blunting hemodynamic stress during extubation, while providing smoother extubation quality.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Combination regimen may blunt extubation hemodynamics in low-risk adults; leaves open superiority versus dexmedetomidine monotherapy in higher-risk groups.
Background: Tracheal extubation is related to many side effects of hemodynamic, especially for patients with comorbid states. The study compared the validity of dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg and low combination dose of dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg plus Lidocaine 1 mg/kg in softening hemodynamic stress response and estimated quality of extubation in study groups. Materials and Methods: The patients in our study, one hundred and fifty of both gender, ASA class I &II patients, aged 20 - 50 years old subject to elective abdominal operations under general anesthesia were allocated into three equal groups. Anesthetic technique was standardized. Before extubation by 10 minutes, the patients in Group N, D, and DL have given 0.9% normal Saline intravenous bolus infusion, dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg and Dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg, respectively within a 10-minute period. Before complete extubation by 90 seconds, in the three groups by syringe ten cc volumes and at time of extubation, Group N and D patients received 0.9% normal Saline intravenous bolus infusion, but in Group DL received Lidocaine 1 mg/kg then extubation completed. Heart rate (HR), Diastolic BP (DBP), Systolic BP (SBP), and Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) were noted at baseline, at the reverse, extubation, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 min and at the regular times after that for two hours. Extubation quality was assessed by extubation quality scale. Aldrete’s recovery score and Ramsay sedation score were also recorded and also any complications were noted and recorded. Results: All the hemodynamic parameters significantly elevated extubation and numerous periods of observation in the normal saline group than dexmedetomidine and dexmedetomidine plus Lidocaine group (p-value = 0.001). Response of tachycardia was seen in 41 (82%) in patients of N group, compared to 18 (36%) and 20 (40%) in D & DL group respectively (p = 0.001). Hypertensive response statistically significant noticed in 40 (80%) patients of N group, 9 (18%) of D group and 12 (24%) of DL group (p = 0.001). Tachycardia duration and the response of hypertension were significantly prolonged in the control group. As regards extubation quality, the three groups differed in D Groups (1.93 ± 0.57) and DL (1.51 ± 0.57) had decreased scores compared to group N (2.67 ± 0.48) modulating smoother extubation (p Conclusion: Low combined dose of (Dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg plus Lidocaine 1 mg/kg) IV was useful as much as Dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg IV in softening hemodynamic stress responses during emergence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdelzaam et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in elective abdominal operations under general anesthesia (n=150). Combined low dose of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine vs. Dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg or normal saline was evaluated on Tachycardia response (p=0.001). A combined low dose of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine was as effective as dexmedetomidine alone in reducing tachycardia (40% vs 36%) compared to normal saline (82%, p=0.001) during extubation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: