Dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage: An open-label pilot randomized controlled trial
Background: Traditionally propofol has been used for providing sedation in dilatation and curettage (D and C). Recently, dexmedetomidine has been tried, but very little evidence exists to support its use. Aims: The aim was to compare hemodynamic and recovery profile of both the drugs along with a de...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2015-01-01
|
| Series: | Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.saudija.org/article.asp?issn=1658-354X;year=2015;volume=9;issue=3;spage=258;epage=262;aulast=Sethi |
| _version_ | 1817979074631434240 |
|---|---|
| author | Priyanka Sethi Sunil Sindhi Ankita Verma K L Tulsiani |
| author_facet | Priyanka Sethi Sunil Sindhi Ankita Verma K L Tulsiani |
| author_sort | Priyanka Sethi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Traditionally propofol has been used for providing sedation in dilatation and curettage (D and C). Recently, dexmedetomidine has been tried, but very little evidence exists to support its use. Aims: The aim was to compare hemodynamic and recovery profile of both the drugs along with a degree of comfort experienced by patients and the usefulness of the drug to surgeons. Settings and Design: Tertiary care center and open-label randomized controlled trial. Materials and Methods: Patients posted for D and C were enrolled in two groups (25 each). Both groups received fentanyl 1 μg/kg intravenous (IV) at the beginning of the procedure. Group P received IV propofol in dose of 1.5 mg/kg over 10-15 min and Group D received dexmedetomidine at a loading dose of 1 μg/kg over 10 min, followed by 0.5 μg/kg/h infusion until Ramsay sedation score reached 3-4. Hemodynamic vitals were compared during and after the procedure. In the recovery room time to reach modified Aldrete score (MAS) of 9-10 and patient′s and surgeon′s satisfaction scores were also recorded and compared. Results: In Group D, patients had statistically significant lower heart rate at 2, 5, 10 and 15 min as compared to Group P. Hypotension was present in 52% in Group P and 4% in Group D (P < 0.05). MAS of 9-10 was achieved in 4.4 min in subjects in Group D in contrast to 16.2 min in Group P (P < 0.05). Group D showed higher patient and surgeon satisfaction scores (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine provide better hemodynamic and recovery profile than propofol. It can be a superior alternative for short surgical day care procedures. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T22:38:16Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-8096f5e4dce4487d899c39cee09934ae |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1658-354X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T22:38:16Z |
| publishDate | 2015-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia |
| spelling | doaj.art-8096f5e4dce4487d899c39cee09934ae2022-12-22T02:26:42ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsSaudi Journal of Anaesthesia1658-354X2015-01-019325826210.4103/1658-354X.154699Dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage: An open-label pilot randomized controlled trialPriyanka SethiSunil SindhiAnkita VermaK L TulsianiBackground: Traditionally propofol has been used for providing sedation in dilatation and curettage (D and C). Recently, dexmedetomidine has been tried, but very little evidence exists to support its use. Aims: The aim was to compare hemodynamic and recovery profile of both the drugs along with a degree of comfort experienced by patients and the usefulness of the drug to surgeons. Settings and Design: Tertiary care center and open-label randomized controlled trial. Materials and Methods: Patients posted for D and C were enrolled in two groups (25 each). Both groups received fentanyl 1 μg/kg intravenous (IV) at the beginning of the procedure. Group P received IV propofol in dose of 1.5 mg/kg over 10-15 min and Group D received dexmedetomidine at a loading dose of 1 μg/kg over 10 min, followed by 0.5 μg/kg/h infusion until Ramsay sedation score reached 3-4. Hemodynamic vitals were compared during and after the procedure. In the recovery room time to reach modified Aldrete score (MAS) of 9-10 and patient′s and surgeon′s satisfaction scores were also recorded and compared. Results: In Group D, patients had statistically significant lower heart rate at 2, 5, 10 and 15 min as compared to Group P. Hypotension was present in 52% in Group P and 4% in Group D (P < 0.05). MAS of 9-10 was achieved in 4.4 min in subjects in Group D in contrast to 16.2 min in Group P (P < 0.05). Group D showed higher patient and surgeon satisfaction scores (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine provide better hemodynamic and recovery profile than propofol. It can be a superior alternative for short surgical day care procedures.http://www.saudija.org/article.asp?issn=1658-354X;year=2015;volume=9;issue=3;spage=258;epage=262;aulast=SethiConscious sedationdexmedetomidinedilatation and curettagegynecologic day care procedurespropofolsedation |
| spellingShingle | Priyanka Sethi Sunil Sindhi Ankita Verma K L Tulsiani Dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage: An open-label pilot randomized controlled trial Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia Conscious sedation dexmedetomidine dilatation and curettage gynecologic day care procedures propofol sedation |
| title | Dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage: An open-label pilot randomized controlled trial |
| title_full | Dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage: An open-label pilot randomized controlled trial |
| title_fullStr | Dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage: An open-label pilot randomized controlled trial |
| title_full_unstemmed | Dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage: An open-label pilot randomized controlled trial |
| title_short | Dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage: An open-label pilot randomized controlled trial |
| title_sort | dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage an open label pilot randomized controlled trial |
| topic | Conscious sedation dexmedetomidine dilatation and curettage gynecologic day care procedures propofol sedation |
| url | http://www.saudija.org/article.asp?issn=1658-354X;year=2015;volume=9;issue=3;spage=258;epage=262;aulast=Sethi |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT priyankasethi dexmedetomidineversuspropofolindilatationandcurettageanopenlabelpilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT sunilsindhi dexmedetomidineversuspropofolindilatationandcurettageanopenlabelpilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT ankitaverma dexmedetomidineversuspropofolindilatationandcurettageanopenlabelpilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT kltulsiani dexmedetomidineversuspropofolindilatationandcurettageanopenlabelpilotrandomizedcontrolledtrial |