Comparison of the Effects of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol on Hemodynamics and Oxygen Balance in Children with Complex Congenital Heart Disease Undergoing Cardiac Surgery

A Comparative Study on Sedation Efficacy Between General and Regional Anesthesia with Dexmedetomidine in Patients Under Maxillofacial Surgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Securing the airway in the surgery of maxillofacial disorders and traumas is fundamental during the operation. The present study aims to investigate the beneficial sedative effects of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in patients who underwent maxillofacial surgery with regional anesthesia compared to general anesthesia.

METHODS

Fifty patients, aged 20-45 years old were randomly divided into two groups of regional anesthesia (RA) and general anesthesia (GA) (each n=25). The group RA received regional block with sedation (DEX: 1 μg/kg infused over 10 min followed by the maintenance dose of 0.5 μg/kg/h) and the group GA underwent general anesthesia (DEX: 0.1 μg/kg/min over 10 min followed by 0.4-0.7 μg/kg/h). Postoperative pain scores, anesthesia outcomes, hemodynamic parameters, the time of the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge and intra and postoperative complications were comparatively assessed in both groups.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of the patients (age, gender, BMI, and ASA physical status) showed no differences between the two groups (P>0.05). Although the duration of surgery and recovery time showed no differences between the groups, the duration of anesthesia and extubation time was remarkably lower in the RA group than in the GA group (P<0.01). Administration of nerve blocks demonstrated less pain and longer sleep time in the postoperative phase as compared to the GA group. Heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure were significantly less in the RA group at the end of the loading dose of DEX and incision time (P<0.05). SpO2, respiration rate and Ramsay sedation scale did not exhibit any significant differences between the two groups at all-time points (P>0.05). No significant differences were observed with regard to the adverse events between the two groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although our findings revealed that both methods are suitable and safe methods for maxillofacial surgery, the outcomes of anesthesia with regional block and sedation include less pain in the postoperative phase, shorter extubation time and earlier discharge from the PACU demonstrated that this method is more reliable for maxillofacial surgery. Further controlled studies are needed to compare the effectiveness and safety profiles of two RA and GA techniques and also to compare DEX with other anesthetic agents to achieve optimum outcomes in maxillofacial surgeries.

A comparison of the outcomes of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil with sufentanil-based general anesthesia in pediatric patients for the transthoracic device closure of ventricular septal defects

Objective

To compare the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil with sufentanil-based general anesthesia for the transthoracic device closure of ventricular septal defects (VSDs) in pediatric patients.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 60 children undergoing the transthoracic device closure of VSDs from January 2019 to June 2020. The patients were divided into two groups based on different anesthesia strategies, including 30 cases in group R (dexmedetomidine- and remifentanil-based general anesthesia) and 30 cases in group S (sufentanil-based general anesthesia).

Results

There was no significant difference in preoperative clinical information, hemodynamics before induction and after extubation, postoperative pain scores, or length of hospital stay between the two groups. However, the hemodynamic data of group R were significantly lower than those of group S at the time points of anesthesia induction, skin incision, thoracotomy, incision closure, and extubation. The amount of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), the duration of mechanical ventilation, and the length of the intensive care unit (ICU) stay in group R were significantly less than those in group S.

Conclusion

Dexmedetomidine combined with remifentanil-based general anesthesia for the transthoracic device closure of VSDs in pediatric patients is safe and effective.

Effect of dexmedetomidine on perioperative hemodynamics and organ protection in children with congenital heart disease: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the effects of dexmedetomidine (Dex) on hemodynamics and organ protection in congenital heart disease (CHD) children who underwent open-heart surgery under cryogenic cardiopulmonary bypass.

METHODS

Ninety children were randomly allocated to group C (0.9% saline 0.2 μg/kg/hour), group D1 (Dex 0.2 μg/kg/hour), and group D2 (Dex 0.4 μg/kg/hour) (n = 30 per group). All participants received fentanyl, propofol and 1% sevoflurane for anesthesia induction. Hemodynamic data were measured from T0 (before the induction) to T7 (30 minutes after extubation). The difference of arterial internal jugular vein bulbar oxygen difference and cerebral oxygen extraction ratio were calculated according to Fick formula. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was performed to detect the serum myocardial, brain and kidney injury markers. The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) was calculated by serum creatinine level. Tracheal extubation time, postoperative pain score and emergence agitation score were also recorded.

RESULTS

Compared with group C, group D1, and D2 exhibited reduction in hemodynamic parameters, myocardial and brain injury indicators, and tracheal extubation time. There were no significant differences in blood urea nitrogen and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin or incidence of AKI among the 3 groups. Besides, the incidence of tachycardia, nausea, vomiting and moderate agitation, and the FLACC scale in group D1 and D2 were lower than those in group C. Moreover, Dex 0.4 g/kg/hour could further reduce the dosage of fentanyl and dopamine compared with Dex 0.2 g/kg/hour.

CONCLUSIONS

Dex anesthesia can effectively maintain hemodynamic stability and diminish organ injuries in CHD children.

Comparative evaluation of propofol and combination of propofol-dexmedetomidine in adjunct with topical airway anesthesia for rigid bronchoscopy: A randomized double-blinded prospective study

Context:

Rigid bronchoscopy (RB) procedures require continuous vigilance and monitoring. Such procedures warrant proper ventilation strategy and titration of potent short-acting anesthetics.

Aims:

To compare propofol with the propofol-dexmedetomidine in conjunction with topical airway anesthesia in two groups during spontaneous assisted ventilation on peri-procedural hemodynamic stability.

Settings and Design:

This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was done on 40 patients who were randomized in two groups, 20 patients in each group; PS (Propofol+ Normal saline) and PD (Propofol+ Dexmedetomidine) group. All patients in both groups were induced with 1% IV propofol (1–3 mg/kg), IV midazolam (0.05 mg/kg), and IV fentanyl (2 μ/kg). PS group received propofol infusion for maintenance along with saline infusion 10 min before induction, whereas PD group also received propofol infusion for maintenance along with Injection dexmedetomidine infusion 10 min before induction. Outcome measured were heart rate (HR), mean blood pressure (MBP), oxygen saturation (SpO₂), and post-procedure awakening using Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAAS) scale and complications.

Results:

In both the groups, MBP decreased significantly from baseline, however, when MBP were compared at the same time points between the groups there were no significant differences. In PD group, HR remained significantly lower when compared with baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 min time points when compared with PS group. Number of patients who developed hypotension requiring vasoactive drugs, their mean dose and duration of hypotension were more in PD group, and they awoke with significant delay.

Conclusions:

Propofol is better than combination of propofol and dexmedetomidine when given in adjunct with topical airway anesthesia for RB in view of early awakening, lesser duration of intra-procedural hypotension, and lesser requirement of vasoactive agents.

A Comparison of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine and Dexmedetomidine-Ketamine Combination Sedation for Transthoracic Echocardiography in Pediatric Patients With Congenital Heart Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of intranasal dexmedetomidine (DEX) and DEX-ketamine (KET) on hemodynamics and sedation quality in children with congenital heart disease.

DESIGN

A randomized controlled, double-blind, prospective trial.

SETTING

A tertiary care teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

The study comprised 60 children undergoing transthoracic echocardiography (TTE).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly allocated into the DEX group (group D [n = 30]) or the DEX-KET group (group D-K [n = 30]). Group D received 2 μg/kg of intranasal DEX; group D-K received 2 μg/kg of DEX and 1 mg/kg of KET intranasally.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was the change in hemodynamics, measured using mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR). Secondary outcomes were onset time, wake-up time, and discharge time. No differences were found in mean arterial pressure or heart rate. The onset time was significantly shorter in group D-K than in group D (9.6 ± 2.9 minutes v 14.3 ± 3.4 minutes; p = 0.031). The wake-up time was longer in group D-K than in group D (52 ± 14.7 minutes v 39.6 ± 12.1 minutes; p = 0.017). The discharge time was longer in group D-K than in group D (61.33 ± 11.59 minutes v 48.17 ± 8.86 minutes; p < 0.001). No differences in hemodynamics were found between the 2 groups. Intranasal DEX was found to be as effective for TTE sedation as intranasal DEX-KET, with longer onset time and shorter recovery and discharge times.

CONCLUSION

No differences in hemodynamics were found between the 2 groups. Intranasal DEX was found to be as effective for TTE sedation as is intranasal DEX-KET, with longer onset time and shorter recovery and discharge times.

Dexmedetomidine improves neurodevelopment and cognitive impairment in infants with congenital heart disease

Aim: Explore if dexmedetomidine (DEX) improves neurodevelopment and cognitive impairment in infants with congenital heart disease. Materials & methods: We retrospectively analyzed 256 pediatric patients aged less than 2 years with heart disease undergoing thoracic surgery. The intelligence quotient and neurodevelopment were tested. Mortality, incidence of postoperation adverse events, duration of mechanical ventilation, and length of stay were recorded and compared. Results: Compared with those not administered DEX, intelligence quotient scores and neurodevelopment evaluation scores increased in patients receiving perioperative DEX. There were no significant differences in mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation or length of stay. Conclusion: The administration of DEX might improve neural development and reduce the adverse effects of general anesthesia in infants with congenital heart disease undergoing surgery and extracorporeal circulation.

Evaluation of Propofol in Comparison with Other General Anesthetics for Surgery in Children Younger than 3 Years: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite well-known advantages, propofol remains off-label in many countries for general anesthesia in children under 3 years of age due to insufficient evidence regarding its use in this population. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of propofol compared with other general anesthetics in children under 3 years of age undergoing surgery through a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing randomized clinical trials.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to find all randomized clinical trials comparing propofol with another general anesthetic that included children under 3 years of age. The relative risk or arcsine-transformed risk difference for dichotomous outcomes and the weighted or standardized mean difference for continuous outcomes were estimated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 249 young children from 6 publications were included. The children who received propofol had statistically significantly lower systolic and diastolic blood pressures, but hypotension was not observed in the propofol groups. The heart rate, stroke volume index, and cardiac index were not significantly different between the propofol and control groups. The propofol groups showed slightly shorter recovery times and a lower incidence of emergence agitation than the control groups, while no difference was observed for the incidence of hypotension, desaturation, and apnea.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that propofol use for general anesthesia in young healthy children undergoing surgery does not increase complications and that propofol could be at least comparable to other anesthetic agents.

Effects of dexmedetomidine on postoperative cognitive function in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting

Effects of dexmedetomidine on postoperative cognitive function in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting were investigated. Eighty patients undergoing systemic anesthesia with extracorporeal coronary artery bypass grafting in The People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region from January 2015 to August 2017 were selected and randomly divided into the observation group (n=40) and control group (n=40). The two groups were treated with dexmedetomidine and equal volume of normal saline, respectively. Moreover, safety indexes including EEG bispectral index (BIS) at 30 min before induction of anesthesia (T0), immediately after intubation (T1), when incision was made (T2), when chest was closed (T3), when operation was completed (T4) and at 6 h after operation (T5), intraoperative circulatory system-related complications, cortisol, epinephrine and norepinephrine levels at the end of surgery as well as anesthesia recovery time and postoperative mechanical ventilation time were recorded and compared. All the patients were followed up for 1 week. Mini-mental state examination (MMSE) and Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) were administered at 1, 3 and 7 days after operation, and the incidence of intraoperative awareness and postoperative cognitive dysfunction was recorded. BIS value in the observation group was lower than that in the control group (P<0.05) at T1-T4 time points, and the BIS value in the observation group was higher than that in the control group (P<0.05) at T5. Incidence rates of intraoperative arrhythmia, hypertension and hypotension in the observation group was significantly lower than those in the control group (P<0.05). At the end of operation, levels of cortisol, epinephrine and norepinephrine in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P<0.05). Anesthesia recovery time and postoperative mechanical ventilation time in the observation group was significantly shorter than the time in the control group (P<0.05). MMSE and MoCA scores of the observation group were better than those of the control group (P<0.05). The incidence of cognitive impairment and postoperative cognitive impairment in the observation group was significantly lower than those in the control group (P<0.05). Therefore, it is concluded that dexmedetomidine can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative cognitive impairment in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, and it is of high safety for circulatory function.

Dexmedetomidine as an Anesthetic Adjuvant in Cardiac Surgery: a Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE:

α-₂-agonists cause sympathetic inhibition combined with parasympathetic activation and have other properties that could be beneficial during cardiac anesthesia. We evaluated the effects of dexmedetomidine as an anesthetic adjuvant compared to a control group during cardiac surgery.

METHODS:

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from all adult patients (> 18 years old) undergoing cardiac surgery. Patients were divided into two groups, regarding the use of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant intraoperatively (DEX group) and a control group who did not receive α-₂-agonist (CON group).

RESULTS:

A total of 1302 patients who underwent cardiac surgery, either coronary artery bypass graft or valve surgery, were included; 796 in the DEX group and 506 in the CON group. Need for reoperation (2% vs. 2.8%, P=0.001), type 1 neurological injury (2% vs. 4.7%, P=0.005) and prolonged hospitalization (3.1% vs. 7.3%, P=0.001) were significantly less frequent in the DEX group than in the CON group. Thirty-day mortality rates were 3.4% in the DEX group and 9.7% in the CON group (P<0.001). Using multivariable Cox regression analysis with in hospital death as the dependent variable, dexmedetomidine was independently associated with a lower risk of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR]=0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-0.65, P≤0.001). The Logistic EuroSCORE (OR=1.05, 95% CI: 1.02-1.10, P=0.004) and age (OR=1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.06, P=0.003) were independently associated with a higher risk of 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION:

Dexmedetomidine used as an anesthetic adjuvant was associated with better outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft and valve surgery. Randomized prospective controlled trials are warranted to confirm our results.

Myocardial protective effects of dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: A meta-analysis and systematic review

Arrhythmias are the common complications following cardiac surgery and contribute to hemodynamic instability, cognitive impairment, thromboembolic events, and congestive heart failure. Prevention of atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery reduces morbidity and among the many available preventive approaches dexmedetomidine shows many positive effects on cardiovascular stability. Even though many studies indicated the beneficial effects of dexmedetomidine, the power of the analysis and conclusion of these studies is rather weak due to relatively smaller number of patients in these studies. In the present meta-analysis, we included a large number of patients, both children and adults, undergoing cardiac surgery, to address the efficacy of dexmedetomidine. Several databases were searched to identify clinical studies comparing the efficacy of dexmedetomidine in myocardial protection in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Cardiac function related parameters including heart rate, blood pressure, tachycardia, arrhthmias, and bradycardia were measured. In accordance with the selection criteria, a total of 18 studies published between 2003 and 2016, with a total of 19,225 patients were included in the present meta-analysis. Dosage of dexmedetomidine was in the range of 0.5-1 µg/kg body weight loading followed by continuous infusion at a rate of 0.2-0.7 µg/kg/h. Dexmedetomidine treatment was found to lower heart rate, systolic blood pressure, incidence of tachycardia and arrhythmias in both adult and pediatric patients, but elevated the risk of bradycardia. In conclusion, results of this meta-analysis indicate that dexmedetomidine is an efficacious cardioprotective drug in adults and children undergoing cardiac surgery.

Outcomes of dexmedetomidine treatment in pediatric patients undergoing congenital heart disease surgery: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine decreases cardiac complications in adults undergoing cardiovascular surgery. This systematic review assessed whether perioperative dexmedetomidine improves congenital heart disease (CHD) surgery outcomes in children.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies that were published until 16 April 2015 and compared dexmedetomidine with placebo or an alternative anesthetic agent during pediatric CHD surgery. The assessed outcomes included hemodynamics, ventilation length, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stays, blood glucose and serum cortisol levels, postoperative analgesia requirements, and postoperative delirium.

RESULTS

Five RCTs and nine observational studies involving 2229 patients were included. In pooled analyses, dexmedetomidine was associated with shorter length of mechanical ventilation (mean difference: -93.36, 95% CI: -137.45, -49.27), lower postoperative fentanyl (mean difference: -24.11, 95% CI: -36.98, -11.24) and morphine (mean difference: -0.07, 95% CI: -0.14, 0.00) requirements, reduced stress response (i.e., lower blood glucose and serum cortisol levels), and lower risk of delirium (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.74). The hemodynamics of dexmedetomidine-treated patients appeared more stable, but there were no significant differences in the ICU or hospital stay durations. Dexmedetomidine may increase the bradycardia and hypotension risk (OR: 3.14, 95% CI: 1.47, 6.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence indicates that dexmedetomidine improves outcomes in children undergoing CHD surgery. However, this finding largely relies on data from observational studies; high-quality RCTs are warranted because of the potential for subject selection bias.