Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 29  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 523-529

Intrathecal versus intravenous dexmedetomidine in characteristics of bupivacaine spinal block in lower abdominal surgery

1 Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt
2 Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Khaled E Ellisy
MSc, 7 Opal Court, Wexham Street, Wexham, Slough, Berkshire SL3 6LZ, UK

Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/1110-2098.198694

Rights and Permissions

Background Dexmedetomidine was shown to improve bupivacaine spinal anesthesia. Objective The aim of this study was to compare between intrathecal and intravenous (i.v.) dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to bupivacaine spinal anesthesia. Patients and methods Sixty ASA physical status I-II aged 20-60 years scheduled for lower abdominal surgery under spinal anesthesia were assigned randomly to two groups. The intrathecal group received intrathecal 15 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine with 5.0 μg dexmedetomidine, followed by an i.v. infusion of normal saline solution during surgery. The i.v. group received intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine 15 mg with 0.5 ml normal saline solution, followed by a loading dose of dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg/kg over 10 min and then a maintenance dose of 0.5 μg/kg/h during surgery. Assessment parameters were vital signs, spinal block, analgesia, sedation, and side effects. Results Blood pressure and heart rate values were lower in the i.v. group than in the intrathecal group. The intrathecal group had earlier sensory onset, higher peak sensory level, and prolonged sensory regression time to S1 dermatome (P < 0.001). The time to Bromage 3 motor block was comparable between both groups, but the regression time to Bromage 0 was prolonged in the intrathecal group (P < 0.001). The intrathecal group had a longer time to first analgesic request (P < 0.001) and less analgesic consumption than the i.v. group. The i.v. group had a higher intraoperative sedation level. The intrathecal group had fewer side effects than the i.v. group, but this was statistically insignificant. Conclusion As an adjuvant for spinal bupivacaine, intrathecal dexmedetomidine is superior to i.v. dexmedetomidine. It provides more stable hemodynamics, greater block augmentation, better analgesia, and fewer side effects including the intraoperative sedation score than the i.v. route.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded113    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal