A double blind, randomized, controlled trial to study the effect of dexmedetomidine on hemodynamic and recovery responses during tracheal extubation

Journal Title: Medpulse International Journal of Anesthesiology - Year 2017, Vol 3, Issue 2


Background: Extubation is known to produce significant hemodynamic disturbances. Literature claims that dexmedetomidine, provides excellent cardiovascular stability, no respiratory depression and may be a useful adjunct to facilitate smooth tracheal extubation. Aim: To study the effect of Dexmedetomidine on haemodynamics and recovery response during tracheal extubation. Materials and Methods: sixty persons of American Society of Anesthesiologists grade I II, aged 20 45 years, scheduled for elective general surgery and Obstetrics and Gynecology were studied after randomization into two groups. Group D and C received an intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg or placebo respectively, over 10 minutes before anticipated time of end of surgery, in a double blind manner. Anesthesia techniques were standardized. Vitals were recorded while starting of the injection, before extubation and at 3 and 10 minutes after extubation. Quality of extubation was evaluated on a 5 point scale and postoperative sedation on a 6 point scale. Adverse events were recorded. Results: Heart rate, systolic, diastolic, mean arterial pressures were significantly higher in group C (P <0.05). Extubation quality score of majority of patients was 2 in group D and 3 in group C. Sedation score of most patients was 3 in group D and 2 in group C. Bradycardia and hypotension incidences were higher in group D. Hypertension, tachycardia and agitations were more in control group. One patient in group D, two patients in group C had vomiting. Complications were also more in control group. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg administered 10 minutes before extubation, stabilizes hemodynamics and facilitates smooth extubation

Authors and Affiliations

Chintala Kishan, Gopal Reddy Narra


Related Articles

Pectoral block versus thoracic paravertebral block for analgesia in breast surgeries: A prospective randomized study

Background: Breast surgeries are associated with postoperative pain and hence various regional blocks are tried for analgesia. Aims: In this study, we compared the effects of ultrasound-guided pectoral nerve block (PECS)...

Clinical audit to evaluate the palliative care and pain relief practices in a tertiary care hospital

Background: Malignancy is one of the life limiting illnesses. Palliative care includes relief of physical as well as emotional, spiritual and social pain. Assessment and management of symptoms is likely to ensure follow...

Comparison between intravenous dexmedetomidine and esmolol for induced hypotension during functional endoscopic sinus surgery and modified radical mastoidectomy

Aim: Bleeding is one of the major problems during surgery which reduces operative field visibility and recognition of anatomical landmarks becomes quite difficult. We aim to compare Dexmedetomidine and esmolol for contro...

A Study effectiveness of hemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation to intravenous dexmedetomidine with respect to different doses

Background: The process of intubation is a noxious stimuli leading to a period of extreme haemodynamic stress and is accompanied with intense sympathetic activity marked by tachycardia and hypertension. Aims and Objectiv...

Ultrasound guided tap block: Comparison of analgesic efficacy of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine

Study objective: Ultrasound guided transverse abdominis plane (TAP) block is an effective method of providing postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal surgeries. We compared the postoperative analgesic ef...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP260982
  • DOI -
  • Views 168
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Chintala Kishan, Gopal Reddy Narra (2017). A double blind, randomized, controlled trial to study the effect of dexmedetomidine on hemodynamic and recovery responses during tracheal extubation. Medpulse International Journal of Anesthesiology, 3(2), 71-75. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-260982