Comparison between Effects of 0.5% Bupivaciane with Dexmedetomidine and 0.5% Bupivaciane Alone in Brachial Plexus Block

Journal Title: Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia - Year 2018, Vol 5, Issue 5

Abstract

Background: Brachial plexus block is a popular and widely employed regional nerve block of upper extremity which avoids the unwanted effect of anesthetic drugs. It has been proved in numerous studies that dexmedetomidine is harmless and effecient in several spinal, epidural and regional anaesthesia in humans. Less exploration of dexmedetomidine in regional blocks was the reason for study. Objectives: To determine efficacy of anesthesia and analgesia between dexmedetomidine-bupivacaine and bupivacaine-alone in brachial block. Methods: After institutional ethics committee approval and patient consent, 70 Upper limb surgery patients, aged 18-60 years; ASA physical statuses 1 and 2were randomized into 2 groups. Group I and II received bupivacaine 0.5%+ 1ml Normal saline, bupivacaine 0.5% 15ml+ 100 mcg dexmedetomidine+ 15ml lignocaine+adrenaline, respectively. A pre-anesthetic checkup was done for all patients, which will include a detailed history, general physical and systemic examination. Results: There was no statistical difference in the heart rate and BP at the start of the procedure. Mean heart rate recorded in study group at 15minutes, 30minutes, 45minutes, 60minutes and 90minutes was statistically significant compared to control group. Mean BP recorded was significantly lower in study group at 15 min, 45 min, 60 min durations in comparison to control group, however it was similar in both the groups at the end of the procedure. Conclusion: In conclusion, dexmedetomidine added to 0.5% bupivacaine and 2% lignocaine + adrenaline is an attractive and safe option for improving the duration and quality of supraclavicular brachial plexus block in upper limb surgeries.

Authors and Affiliations

Sagar S.

Keywords

Related Articles

Comparative Study between Ropivacaine 0.2% Versus Bupivacaine 0.2% in Epidural Labor Analgesia

Introduction: The epidural analgesia is popular and effective method of labour analgesia since the parturient remains awake, pain free and comfortable, watches her delivery and immediately can feed her baby. Bupivacaine...

Preventive Analgesic Efficacy of Intravenous Tramadol Versus Intravenous Nalbuphine for Elective Inguinal Hernia Repair Surgeries :Randomised Controlled Trial

Background Information: One of the challenges in postoperative care in a developing country is the non-availability of narcotics. Morphine and fentanyl have excellent analgesic action but they are difficult procure as th...

Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Clonidine as Adjuvant to Bupivacaine in Ultrasound Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block

Background and Aims: We compared analgesic effect of dexmedetomidine and clonidine as adjuvant to 30 ml solution of 0.25% bupivacaine in ultrasound guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block. Materials and Methods: Ni...

Ultrasound Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block for Post Operative Analgesia in Patient Undergoing Open Appendicectomy: A Randomized Controlled Study

Background: Analgesia is an important concern in the post operative period in terms of complications like delayed mobility, respiratory distress and thromboembolic events. There have been a number of approaches for post...

Attenuation of Stress Response during Intubation for Laparoscopic Procedures: A Comparative Study between Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Lidocaine

Introduction: During laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation, one of the most dreaded complications is hemodynamic instability which is a well-archived certainty and this response in most susceptible patients induces my...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP538340
  • DOI 10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.5518.22
  • Views 90
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Sagar S. (2018). Comparison between Effects of 0.5% Bupivaciane with Dexmedetomidine and 0.5% Bupivaciane Alone in Brachial Plexus Block. Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia, 5(5), 829-835. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-538340