The Efficacy of Hypotensive Agents on Intraoperative Bleeding and Recovery Following General Anesthesia for Nasal Surgery: A Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

A systematic review of the literature was conducted to evaluate hypotensive agents in terms of their adverse effects and associations with perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing nasal surgery.

METHODS

Two authors independently searched databases (Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane databases) up to February 2020 for randomized controlled trials comparing the perioperative administration of a hypotensive agent with a placebo or other agent. The outcomes of interest for this analysis were intraoperative morbidity, operative time, intraoperative bleeding, hypotension, postoperative nausea/vomiting, and postoperative pain. Both a standard pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were conducted.

RESULTS

Our analysis was based on 37 trials. Treatment networks consisting of six interventions (placebo, clonidine, dexmedetomidine, beta-blockers, opioids, and nitroglycerine) were defined for the network meta-analysis. Dexmedetomidine resulted in the greatest differences in intraoperative bleeding (-0.971; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.161 to -0.781), intraoperative fentanyl administration (-3.683; 95% CI, -4.848 to -2.518), and postoperative pain (-2.065; 95% CI, -3.170 to -0.960) compared with placebo. The greatest difference in operative time compared with placebo was achieved with clonidine (-0.699; 95% CI, -0.977 to -0.421). All other agents also had beneficial effects on the measured outcomes. Dexmedetomidine was less likely than other agents to cause adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the superiority of the systemic use of dexmedetomidine as a perioperative hypotensive agent compared with the other five tested agents. However, the other agents were also superior to placebo in improving operative time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative pain.

The effects of dexmedetomidine and tramadol on post-operative pain and agitation, and extubation quality in paediatric patients undergoing adenotonsillectomy surgery: A randomized trial

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Adenotonsillectomies are common surgical procedures performed under general anaesthesia in childhood. Post-operative pain and agitation are complications associated with this procedure. We compared the effects of dexmedetomidine and tramadol on post-operative pain, agitation, haemodynamic parameters, and extubation quality in patients undergoing an adenotonsillectomy using sevoflurane as an anaesthetic agent.

METHODS

Sixty paediatric patients who had undergone an adenotonsillectomy were included in this study. The patients were randomized into two groups that received either dexmedetomidine (n = 30) or tramadol (n = 30). Haemodynamic variables, extubation time, post-operative pain, agitation and adverse events were recorded for all patients. Post-operative pain was assessed with the pain point system scale (PPSS), and agitation was assessed using the Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale (SAS).

RESULTS

Patients in the dexmedetomidine group had significantly lower heart rates than the tramadol group. In addition, patients in the dexmedetomidine group had significantly lower post-operative PPSS and Riker SAS scores than patients in the tramadol group. Not breathing, cough-bucking and desaturation after extubation occurred less frequently in patients who received dexmedetomidine than in patients who received tramadol. However, the time to extubation was significantly longer for patients who received dexmedetomidine.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that dexmedetomidine was more effective than tramadol for mitigating post-operative pain and agitation in paediatric patients following an adenotonsillectomy with sevoflurane. Although dexmedetomidine was associated with a longer time to extubation, it was also associated with fewer complications following extubation compared with tramadol.

A Comparative Study of the Amount of Bleeding and Hemodynamic Changes between Dexmedetomidine Infusion and Remifentanil Infusion for Controlled Hypotensive Anesthesia in Lumbar Discopathy Surgery: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Clinical Trial

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the volume of blood loss and hemodynamic changes in patients undergoing lumbar discopathy, after continuous infusions of dexmedetomidine versus remifentanil during anesthesia with controlled low blood pressure.

Methods

In this randomized double-blind clinical trial, 60 patients aged 20 to 65 years were randomly assigned to control and intervention groups. The intervention group received a continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine at 0.3 - 0.7 µg/kg/hour plus propofol at 50 - 100 µg/kg/minute. The control group was given a continuous infusion of remifentanil at 0.1 to 1 µg/kg/minute plus the same dose of propofol as above. The primary outcome was the amount of patient's bleeding during surgery, and secondary outcomes were changes in the patient's systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, and urinary output.

Results

Univariate and multivariate analyses of the main outcome in the control and intervention groups showed that there was no significant difference between the two drugs with regards to the volume of blood loss, mean arterial pressure, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Postoperative side effects were significantly lower in the intervention group (P = 0.002).

Conclusions

Administration of dexmedetomidine plus propofol in comparison with remifentanil plus propofol did not show any significant difference regarding blood loss and hemodynamic changes; however, it reduced some side effects after surgery and decreased analgesic requirement in the postoperative period. Taken together, the findings of this study do not support strong recommendations for dexmedetomidine infusion for all patients and the decision should be taken with caution on basis of the anesthesiologist’s expert opinion and the patient’s condition during surgery.

Can Dexmedetomidine Influence Recovery Profiles from General Anesthesia in Nasal Surgery?

Objectives Dexmedetomidine has sympatholytic, sedative, anesthetic, and analgesic effects, as well as vasoconstrictive effects, which may help prevent hypotension under general anesthesia. This meta-analysis aimed to perform a systematic review of the literature and investigate the effect of dexmedetomidine on perioperative morbidity following nasal surgery and its adverse effects. Data Sources MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane database. Review Methods Two authors independently searched the databases from their inception to March 2017. Studies were selected that compared perioperative dexmedetomidine administration (dexmedetomidine groups) with a placebo or remifentanil (control groups) with regard to intraoperative morbidity, including surgical time, bleeding amount, hypotension, and bradycardia during operation, and postoperative morbidity, such as emergence agitation, nausea and vomiting, and sedation after operation. Results Surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, dose of inhaled anesthetic gas, dose of fentanyl, postoperative pain, and incidence of emergence agitation were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group versus the placebo group. In contrast, there were no significant differences in intraoperative hemodynamic stability and postoperative residual sedation and nausea and vomiting between groups. Additionally, compared with remifentanil (a currently widely used agent), dexmedetomidine was superior in view of postoperative pain and intraoperative blood pressure control. Conclusion This meta-analysis shows that the systemic administration of dexmedetomidine can decrease surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, and doses of intraoperative inhaled anesthetic gas and fentanyl as compared with placebo. It can also decrease postoperative pain and incidence of the emergence agitation. Due to the small number of studies, further clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.

Efficacy of dexmedetomidine for perioperative morbidities in pediatric tonsillectomy: A metaanalysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the effects of perioperative dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to tonsillectomy compared with opioid or sham in children.

DATA SOURCE

Five databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched from inception of article collections to April 2017.

REVIEW METHODS

Prospective, randomized controlled studies that compared outcomes between children who underwent tonsillectomy plus dexmedetomidine administration (intervention) and children who underwent tonsillectomy with placebo or opioid (control) were systemically and independently reviewed by two researchers. The outcomes of interest were emergence agitation, postoperative pain intensity, rescue analgesic consumption, and other morbidities (nausea and vomiting and agitation).

RESULTS

Fifteen studies with n = 1,552 met the inclusion criteria. Postoperative pain scores and the need for analgesics in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were significantly decreased in the dexmedetomidine group versus the control group. The incidence and degree of agitation and desaturation incidence in the PACU also were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the control group. Additionally, there was no significant difference in the duration of staying PACU between both groups. In subgroup analyses by administration method (bolus injection or continuous injection), dexmedetomidine was shown to be effective at reducing postoperative morbidities regardless of administration method.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative administration of dexmedetomidine can provide pain and agitation relief without side effects in children undergoing adenotonsillectomy. Considering the high heterogeneity of results within some parameters; however, further clinical trials with robust research methodology should be conducted to confirm the results of this study. Laryngoscope, 128:E184-E193, 2018.