Literature DB >> 21923454

Effect of a dexmedetomidine substitution during a nationwide propofol shortage in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Marc G Reichert1, Whitney A Jones, Roger L Royster, Thomas F Slaughter, Neal D Kon, Edward H Kincaid.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of substituting dexmedetomidine for propofol during a nationwide propofol shortage on postoperative time to extubation and opioid requirements in patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.
DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study.
SETTING: Single-center cardiothoracic intensive care unit (ICU) in a tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Seventy adults undergoing isolated, primary, elective CABG who received dexmedetomidine between April 1 and June 30, 2010, during the propofol shortage (35 patients [cases]) or who received propofol between January 1 and March 31, 2010, or between July 1 and September 30, 2010 (35 patients [controls]) for postoperative sedation were included. Patients in the dexmedetomidine group were matched 1:1 to patients in the propofol group based on age, sex, weight, number of vessels bypassed, preoperative ejection fraction, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and aortic cross-clamp time.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome consisted of opioid requirements in the first 12 hours after arrival to the ICU in the dexmedetomidine- and propofol-treated patients. Secondary outcomes included the time to extubation (from ICU admission until extubation) and opioid requirements in the first 24 hours. No significant demographic differences were noted between treatment groups. Median opioid requirements in the first 12 hours, as measured by morphine equivalents, were 8.0 mg in the propofol group and 7.0 mg in the dexmedetomidine group (p=0.1). Similarly, at 24 hours, opioid requirements were 16.7 and 17.3 mg in the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups, respectively (p=0.4). The time to extubation demonstrated that patients in the propofol group were extubated at a median of 300 minutes and patients in the dexmedetomidine group were extubated at a median of 318 minutes after ICU arrival (p=0.5).
CONCLUSION: No statistically significant differences were noted between the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups when assessing the outcomes of opioid requirements and the time to extubation. A multicenter, prospective, randomized, blinded study is needed to determine the optimal sedative after CABG surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21923454     DOI: 10.1592/phco.31.7.673

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacotherapy        ISSN: 0277-0008            Impact factor:   4.705


  9 in total

1.  Comparison of dexmedetomidine versus propofol for sedation in mechanically ventilated patients after cardiovascular surgery.

Authors:  Matthew Wanat; Kalliopi Fitousis; Fariedeh Boston; Faisal Masud
Journal:  Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J       Date:  2014 Apr-Jun

2.  Clinical and economic impact of substituting dexmedetomidine for propofol due to a US drug shortage: examination of coronary artery bypass graft patients at an urban medical centre.

Authors:  Brandi N Thoma; Julius Li; Cara M McDaniel; Cindy J Wordell; Nicholas Cavarocchi; Laura T Pizzi
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Effect of dexmedetomidine on myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury.

Authors:  Shoulin Chen; Fuzhou Hua; Jun Lu; Yu Jiang; Yanhua Tang; Lei Tao; Bing Zou; Qinghua Wu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-11-15

4.  Effects of ketamine versus dexmedetomidine maintenance infusion in posterior spinal fusion surgery on acute postoperative pain.

Authors:  Nasim Nikoubakht; Mahzad Alimian; Seyed Hamid Reza Faiz; Pooya Derakhshan; Mohammad Saleh Sadri
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2021-04-26

5.  Can dexmedetomidine be a safe and efficacious sedative agent in post-cardiac surgery patients? a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yi Yun Lin; Bin He; Jian Chen; Zhi Nong Wang
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 9.097

6.  Propofol or benzodiazepines for short- and long-term sedation in intensive care units? An economic evaluation based on meta-analytic results.

Authors:  Lorenzo Pradelli; Massimiliano Povero; Hartmut Bürkle; Tim-Gerald Kampmeier; Giorgio Della-Rocca; Astrid Feuersenger; Jean-Francois Baron; Martin Westphal
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2017-11-09

7.  Safety and efficacy of ketamine-dexmedetomidine versus ketamine-propofol combinations for sedation in patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Authors:  Mona Mohamed Mogahd; Mohammed Shafik Mahran; Ghada Foad Elbaradi
Journal:  Ann Card Anaesth       Date:  2017 Apr-Jun

8.  Sedation effects by dexmedetomidine versus propofol in decreasing duration of mechanical ventilation after open heart surgery.

Authors:  Ahmed Said Elgebaly; Mohab Sabry
Journal:  Ann Card Anaesth       Date:  2018 Jul-Sep

9.  The safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine for postoperative sedation in the cardiac surgery intensive care unit.

Authors:  S R Chorney; M E Gooch; M T Oberdier; D Keating; R F Stahl
Journal:  HSR Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth       Date:  2013
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.