No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Comparison between effect of bupivacaine and bupivacaine with dexamethasone on duration of analgesia in spinal anaesthesia for elective caesarean section
Abstract
Aim: To compare mean duration of analgesia with intrathecal Bupivacaine alone versus intrathecal Bupivacaine plus Dexamethasone, for elective caesarean section. Methods: This Randomized controlled trial was conducted in the Department of Anaesthesia, Nishtar Hospital Multan from February 2013 to August 2013. Sixty 60 patients were included. They were divided in two groups. Each group comprised 30 patients. Results: The mean duration of analgesia in group BD was 391.93±25.51 and in group BS was 179.43±23.32 [P-value <0.05). Conclusion: The results of the study conclude that the addition of intrathecal dexamethasone to bupivacaine significantly improved the mean duration of analgesia when used for elective caesarean section.
... A few studies have demonstrated a reduction of local anesthetic dosage requirement in SAB with the use of adjuvant IT dexamethasone. [31,32] However, its dose and safety profile have not been well studied. This is the most comprehensive meta-analysis of outcomes associated with neuraxial dexamethasone to date. ...
The use of intrathecal (IT) dexamethasone during subarachnoid block (SAB) has not been evaluated. There are no pooled data available to decide on the optimal regimen of IT dexamethasone during SAB, irrespective of the type of surgery. There is uncertainty about its dosage, effectiveness, and safety, and a need to establish clear guidelines on its use. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of use of IT dexamethasone during SAB. We performed a meta-analysis (PROSPERO, CRD42022304944) of trials that included patients who underwent a variety of surgical procedures under SAB. Patients received concomitant IT dexamethasone as an adjuvant to spinal local anesthetics. The analyzed outcomes included sensory and motor effects as well as adverse and/or beneficial side effects. Subgroup analysis was planned based on different doses used. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to estimate the required sample size information (RIS) for each outcome. Eighteen studies (2531 participants) were included in this analysis. Addition of IT dexamethasone (4-8 mg) to heavy bupivacaine effectively prolonged the duration of sensory blockade (mean difference, MD = 63.8 minutes; [95% confidence interval, CI, 33.1-94.5], P < 0.0001), two-segment regression time (MD = 20.1[95% CI, 0.96-39.2], P = 0.04) and first rescue analgesic time (MD = 143.3 [95% CI, 90.3-196.0], P = 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed superior effects of 8 mg dose over 4 mg for sensory and analgesic effects. The effect of dexamethasone on duration of motor blockade was inconclusive. Additionally, lower risk ratios (RRs) were recorded for spinal anesthesia-related hypotension (RR = 0.74 [95% CI, 0.6-0.9], P = 0.0003) and nausea/vomiting (RR = 0.62 [95% CI, 0.41-0.93], P = 0.02) in the dexamethasone group. For outcomes such as sensory blockade, analgesia, and hypotension, the required information size was reached during TSA. In conclusion, IT dexamethasone, used as an adjuvant to spinal local anesthetic, especially at the dose of 8 mg, increases sensory blockade duration and the time for request of the first rescue analgesic. SAB-induced side effects such as hypotension, nausea, and vomiting are lesser with the use of IT dexamethasone. However, further studies are necessary to draw meaningful conclusions on its safety profile.
... Few investigations have shown that Dexamethasone administered intrathecally prolongs the time the sensory block lasts and enhances postoperative analgesia without noticeable side effects. 1,[19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] According to a study by Mohamed Abdul Mohsen Abdul Naiem Ismaiel et al., bupivacaine can be safely supplemented with Dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine. Dexamethasone prolongs the duration of postoperative analgesia, while during and following surgery, dexmedetomidine is more efficient at sedating the patient. ...
Any individual undergoing surgery is concerned about postoperative discomfort. It modifies the body’s physiological reaction and impacts an individual’s psychological state. A physician can meet early mobilization goals by effectively managing postoperative pain and preventing related co-morbidities. Targeting different phases of the pain pathway, from perception to central modulation, is successfully accomplished through the use of different drug combinations and regional anesthetic block techniques. Local anaesthetics injected intrathecally in a single injection create a superb surgical field and can even make a patient pain-free two to three hours following surgery. By adding certain adjuncts, this period can be prolonged, and there will be long-term benefits in terms of decreasing the dosage of opioid analgesics. Because of its faster start of the action and low side effects, spinal anaesthesia is the procedure most frequently used for caesarean sections. Many intrathecal additives have been explored since it has a limited role in postoperative pain control. Adjuvants such as opioids, clonidine, adrenaline, and phenylephrine have been explored recently. These chemicals have been linked to several problems, including tachycardia, respiratory depression with opioids, hypertension with adrenaline and clonidine, and excessive sedation. In this study, our primary objective is to compare the duration of postoperative analgesia between Dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine, as Dexamethasone is an anti-inflammatory drug and dexmedetomidine is an alpha-two agonist that binds with a G protein-coupled receptor. our secondary objectives include comparing intraoperative hemodynamics, intraoperative sedation, and intraoperative shivering between Dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine. CTRI REF.NO-REF/2023/05/067283
Introduction:
the aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone added to bupivacaine and sufentanil in spinal anesthesia to improve postoperative analgesia after femur upper extremity surgery.
Methods:
we conducted a prospective controlled, randomized double-blinded clinical trial including patients proposed for surgery of the upper extremity of the femur under spinal anesthesia. The patients were randomly allocated to receive intrathecally 10 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% with 5µg sufentanil and 2 ml normal saline (control group) or 10 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% with 5 µg sufentanil and 8 mg dexamethasone (Dexa group). The patients were evaluated for onset time and duration of sensory block, duration of pain-free period, overage consumption of morphine in the 6 first postoperative hours, hemodynamic parameters, nausea, and vomiting, or other complications.
Results:
fifty-eight patients were analyzed. There were no signification differences in demographic data and onset time of the sensory block between the two groups. Sensory block duration was 121.55 ± 16.42 minutes in the control group and 183.62 ± 33.93 minutes in the Dexa group which was significantly higher in the Dexa group (P<0.001). The pain-free period was longer in the Dexa group than in the control group (P<0.001). There was a reduction in morphine consumption during the first 6 postoperative hours in the Dexa group against the control group (p=0.02). The frequency of complications was not different between the two groups.
Conclusion:
the addition of intrathecal dexamethasone in spinal anesthesia improved the postoperative analgesia after femur upper extremity surgery.
Introduction
Spinal anesthesia is the most consistent block for lower limb orthopedic surgeries. We conducted this randomized prospective study to evaluate comparative efficacy of intrathecal dexamethasone with fentanyl and normal saline as adjuvants to hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia administered to patients
scheduled for lower limb orthopedic surgery.
Materials and methods
105 patients scheduled for lower limb orthopedic surgeries under spinal anesthesia were included in this clinical trial. After randomization, patients received an intrathecal injection of hyperbaric bupivacaine (12.5 mg) with 4 mg of dexamethasone in group I, hyperbaric bupivacaine (12.5 mg) with 25 ug fentanyl with 0.5
ml of normal saline in group II and hyperbaric bupivacaine (12.5 mg) with normal saline (1 ml) in group III, so as to make volume of drug equal in all three groups. The observer evaluated the sensory and motor blocks and other parameters like time to self-void, stay in post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and complications.
Results
The total duration of sensory blockade was found to be 311.43, 197.86 and 115.29 minutes and motor blockade of 223.43, 163.86 and 83.0 minutes in groups I, II and III respectively. The PACU stay was 233.14, 173.86 and 93.00 minutes in groups I, II and III, respectively. The average time to self-void was 400.00, 315.29 and 203.00 in three groups, respectively.
Conclusion
Intrathecal dexamethasone seemed to be an effective adjuvant to spinal bupivacaine as it prolongs the duration of analgesia, stable hemodynamic profile with minimal side effects.
Purpose:
We quantified the dose-sparing effect of epinephrine by comparing the median effective dose (ED(50)) of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine co-administered with epinephrine with the ED(50) of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine alone.
Methods:
Three groups were randomly generated from 162 patients undergoing total knee replacement arthroplasty under combined spinal and epidural anesthesia: Group B (bupivacaine), Group BE1 (bupivacaine plus epinephrine 100 μg), and Group BE2 (bupivacaine plus epinephrine 200 μg). Each group was further divided by bupivacaine doses of 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, or 11 mg. The anesthesia was defined as successful if a bilateral T12 sensory block occurred within 15 min, and no intraoperative epidural supplement was required. The ED(50) and ED(95) for successful anesthesia and successful tourniquet pain blockade were determined separately by probit regression analysis.
Results:
The ED(50) and ED(95) of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine for successful anesthesia were not different among the groups: the ED(50) values were 7.1 mg [95 % confidence interval (95 % CI) 6.0-8.0 mg] in Group B, 6.2 mg (95 % CI 4.8-7.2 mg) in Group BE1, and 6.3 mg (95 % CI 4.9-7.2 mg) in Group BE2. However, the ED(50) and ED(95) values for tourniquet pain control were significantly smaller in Groups BE1 and BE2 than in Group B: the ED(50) values were 7.2 mg (95 % CI 6.3-7.9 mg), 5.5 mg (95 % CI 4.1-6.3 mg), and 5.3 mg (95 % CI 3.7-6.2 mg) in Groups B, BE1, and BE2, respectively. The incidence of tourniquet pain was significantly lower in Groups BE1 and BE2 than in Group B. The time to patients' requests for supplemental analgesia was significantly longer in Groups BE1 and BE2 than in Group B.
Conclusions:
Intrathecal epinephrine did not decrease the dose of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine required for successful anesthesia. However, it reduced the dose required for tourniquet pain blockade.