COMPARISON BETWEEN 0.5% BUPIVACAINE + DEXAMETHASONE COMBINATION AND 0.5% BUPIVACAINE + CLONIDINE COMBINATION IN BRACHIAL PLEXUS BLOCK BY SUPRACLAVICULAR APPROACH USING ULTRASOUND-GUIDED TECHNIQUE

Journal Title: Journal of Evidence Based Medicine and Healthcare - Year 2017, Vol 4, Issue 73

Abstract

BACKGROUND Brachial plexus blocks, alone or in combination with general anaesthesia has become one of the most important anaesthesia techniques for surgeries in the upper limb. Prolongation of analgesia using perineural catheters are not yet popular and we are in need for adjuvant that can prolong the action of local anaesthetics after single injection peripheral nerve blocks. Dexamethasone and clonidine are two commonly used adjuvants. This study was undertaken to compare the analgesic efficacy of dexamethasone and clonidine. MATERIALS AND METHODS Ninety adult patients fitting under the inclusion criteria were assigned to 3 groups of 30 each and received ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block. They received either dexamethasone 8 mg (group D) or clonidine 1 mcg/kg (group C) or saline 2 mL (group S) with 15 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine. The onset of sensory and motor blocks, duration of analgesia and the duration of motor block were assessed. RESULTS The onset of sensory and motor block were comparable in all the three groups (17.50 ± 2.86 minutes and 30.33 ± 4.14 minutes; 17.17 ± 3.13 minutes and 31.0 ± 4.8 minutes; 18.33 ± 3.55 minutes and 31.0 ± 5.48 minutes for groups D, C and S, respectively. The duration of analgesia and motor blockade was markedly prolonged in dexamethasone group (19.41 ± 2.60 hours and 17.19 ± 2.13 hours) and moderately prolonged in clonidine group (11.49 ± 1.66 hours and 10.41 ± 1.18 hours) when compared to saline group (7.56 ± 1.65 hours and 6.22 ± 1.43 hours). CONCLUSION Dexamethasone proves to be a better adjuvant compared to clonidine as it considerably prolongs analgesia and is devoid of significant side effects. But, the prolonged motor block is still a matter of concern and these arch for adjuvant that selectively prolongs analgesia without impairing motor function continues.

Authors and Affiliations

Yadhuraj M. K, Narasimha Reddy, Vinay D. M, Akhil Rao U. K

Keywords

Related Articles

A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY ON TRACHEOSTOMY IN A RURAL TERTIARY CARE CENTRE

BACKGROUND Tracheostomy is the procedure in which an opening is created on the anterior wall of the trachea, thereby creating a stoma between the trachea and cervical skin. It is a lifesaving procedure performed to maint...

ACUTE LUNG INJURY

BACKGROUND Acute lung injury (ALI) and its most severe manifestation, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), are defined by physiological criteria i.e. ratio of PaO2 to inspiratory oxygen fraction (FIO2) ≤ 300 mmHg...

INFLUENCE OF AMNIOTIC FLUID INDEX ON FOETAL OUTCOME

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In these days of smaller families and the obstetrician having to share the onus of giving a healthy child capable of independent existence as well as to ensure that the population is limited for...

A STUDY OF DIAGNOSTIC LAPAROSCOPY IN CHRONIC ABDOMINAL PAIN

BACKGROUND Chronic abdominal pains are amongst the abdominal conditions most difficult to manage. Chronic abdominal pain is a difficult complaint. 1 Most patients in this group would have already undergone many diagnosti...

BIRTH INJURY RELATED UNILATERAL ANTERIOR NARES PARTIAL FIBROUS ATRESIA: A RARE CASE REPORT

Congenital atresia of anterior nares has been rarely reported and it may co-exist along with posterior choanal atresia. (1,2) In our case, birth injury caused by forceps delivery has caused unilateral anterior nares part...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP283402
  • DOI 10.18410/jebmh/2017/865
  • Views 113
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Yadhuraj M. K, Narasimha Reddy, Vinay D. M, Akhil Rao U. K (2017). COMPARISON BETWEEN 0.5% BUPIVACAINE + DEXAMETHASONE COMBINATION AND 0.5% BUPIVACAINE + CLONIDINE COMBINATION IN BRACHIAL PLEXUS BLOCK BY SUPRACLAVICULAR APPROACH USING ULTRASOUND-GUIDED TECHNIQUE. Journal of Evidence Based Medicine and Healthcare, 4(73), 4343-4347. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-283402