Analgesic effects of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil on periprocedural pain during percutaneous ablation of renal carcinoma

Local anesthesia for percutaneous US/CT-guided bipolar radiofrequency ablation of small renal masses: A safe and feasible alternative

PURPOSE

This study is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of local anesthesia (LA) for percutaneous ultrasound/computed tomography (US/CT)-guided bipolar radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for small renal masses (SRMs) by comparing the LA with general anesthesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was carried out between January 2018 to June 2020, 102 patients with SRMs were treated with US/CT-guided bipolar RFA. General anesthesia (GA) was performed in 42 and LA was performed in 60 patients. Demographics, tumor characteristics, peri-procedural data, pathologic and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. The factors associated with pain were also identified.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in demographics and tumor characteristics between the LA and GA group. A statistically significant difference was observed in terms of procedural time (P = 0.010) and hospital stays (P < 0.001). The maximum perceived pain in LA group comprised 60.0% (36 of 60) mild, 40.0% (24 of 60) moderate. The anxiety in LA group comprised 65.0% (39 of 60) mild, 33.3% (20 of 60) moderate, 1.7% (1 of 60) severe. On multivariate analysis, tumor diameter was a significant predictor for pain in RFA procedure (OR 1.560, 95% CI 1.233-1.974, P < 0.001). All patients were followed up for a median (range) of 12 (2-24) months. Local recurrence occurred in 8.3% (5 of 60) of the LA group and in 7.1% (3 of 42) in GA group (P = 1.000).

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous bipolar RFA of SRMs using CT and ultrasound guidance under LA can be an effective and tolerable method for patients who are unfit for surgery and provide satisfactory oncologic control.

Remifentanil provides an increased proportion of time under light sedation than fentanyl when combined with dexmedetomidine for mechanical ventilation

Objective

To compare the effects of remifentanil versus fentanyl during light sedation with dexmedetomidine in adults receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) in the intensive care unit.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the use of remifentanil versus fentanyl in adults receiving MV with dexmedetomidine sedation. The primary outcome was the proportion of time under light sedation (Richmond Agitation–Sedation Scale score between −1 and 0) during MV.

Results

We included 94 patients and classified 58 into the remifentanil group and 36 into the fentanyl group. The mean proportion of time under light sedation during MV was 66.6% ± 18.5% in the remifentanil group and 39.9% ± 27.3% in the fentanyl group. In the multivariate analysis with control for confounding factors, patients in the remifentanil group showed a significantly higher proportion of time under light sedation than patients in the fentanyl group (mean difference: 24.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval: 12.9–35.8).

Conclusions

Remifentanil use might increase the proportion of time under light sedation in patients receiving MV compared with fentanyl administration.