OBJECTIVES: We compared the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil hydrochloride in intraoperative field conditions and recovery during endoscopic sinus surgery. METHODS:Sixty-six patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II) scheduled for elective endoscopic sinus surgery were enrolled in this prospective, double-blinded, randomized study. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups. Propofol, 2 to 2.5 mg/kg, was administered to both groups to induce anesthesia, which was maintained with desflurane. One group received dexmedetomidine 1 microg/kg over 10 minutes at anesthesia induction, followed by 0.4 to 0.8 microg/kg per hour infusion during maintenance, whereas the other group received remifentanil 1 microg/kg over 1 minute at anesthesia induction, followed by 0.2 to 0.4 microg/kg per minute infusion during maintenance. Surgical conditions, hemodynamic parameters, intraoperative blood loss, time to extubation, sedation, and pain in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were recorded. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to surgical field conditions, blood loss, or extubation time. The sedation score (Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation) in the PACU was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the remifentanil group (p < 0.001). No differences were found in total blood loss, surgical field conditions, hemodynamic parameters, time to extubation, or pain in the PACU when the two groups were compared (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although remifentanil and dexmedetomidine both enabled hypotensive anesthesia and good intraoperative fields for endoscopic sinus surgery, recovery was faster with remifentanil than with dexmedetomidine in the immediate postoperative period.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: We compared the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil hydrochloride in intraoperative field conditions and recovery during endoscopic sinus surgery. METHODS: Sixty-six patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II) scheduled for elective endoscopic sinus surgery were enrolled in this prospective, double-blinded, randomized study. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups. Propofol, 2 to 2.5 mg/kg, was administered to both groups to induce anesthesia, which was maintained with desflurane. One group received dexmedetomidine 1 microg/kg over 10 minutes at anesthesia induction, followed by 0.4 to 0.8 microg/kg per hour infusion during maintenance, whereas the other group received remifentanil 1 microg/kg over 1 minute at anesthesia induction, followed by 0.2 to 0.4 microg/kg per minute infusion during maintenance. Surgical conditions, hemodynamic parameters, intraoperative blood loss, time to extubation, sedation, and pain in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were recorded. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to surgical field conditions, blood loss, or extubation time. The sedation score (Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation) in the PACU was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the remifentanil group (p < 0.001). No differences were found in total blood loss, surgical field conditions, hemodynamic parameters, time to extubation, or pain in the PACU when the two groups were compared (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although remifentanil and dexmedetomidine both enabled hypotensive anesthesia and good intraoperative fields for endoscopic sinus surgery, recovery was faster with remifentanil than with dexmedetomidine in the immediate postoperative period.
Authors: Y Escamilla; A Cardesín; L Samara; S López; A Izquierdo; M Fradera; R Vives; M Bernal-Sprekelsen; Caridad Pontes Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2019-07-30 Impact factor: 2.503