Jie Chen1, Jia-qian Zhou1, Zhi-feng Chen2, Yan Huang2, Hong Jiang3. 1. Attending, Department of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. 2. Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. 3. Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. Electronic address: dr.jianghong@yahoo.com.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the safety and efficacy of sedation induced by dexmedetomidine and propofol after oral and maxillofacial surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this trial, 66 patients 18 to 50 years old received oral and maxillofacial surgery and required postoperative nasal endotracheal intubation under overnight sedation withdexmedetomidine or propofol. The dexmedetomidine group (group D) received dexmedetomidine 1.0 μg/kg intravenously for 10 minutes after entering the recovery room. The dose was maintained by giving an intravenous injection of dexmedetomidine 0.4 μg/kg. The injection rate could be modulated from 0.2 to 0.7 μg/kg/hour in the intensive care unit (ICU). If the Ramsay score was lower than 2 and involuntary limb movement occurred, other sedatives were used. The propofol group (group P) was given propofol 0.1 mg/kg intravenously for 10 minutes after entering the recovery room and then maintained with intravenous injections of propofol 1 to 2 mg/kg/hour in the recovery room and ICU. RESULTS: The oxygen desaturation of group P was higher than that of group D (at the first sedation time of 30 minutes), but the mean blood pressure of group P was significantly lower than that of group D at the 10-minute time point. The Ramsay score was higher in group D after the first 3 hours of sedation than in group P (P < .05). CONCLUSION:Dexmedetomidine showed similar safety and efficacy as propofol and could be used for tube-retaining sedation after oral and maxillofacial surgery.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the safety and efficacy of sedation induced by dexmedetomidine and propofol after oral and maxillofacial surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this trial, 66 patients 18 to 50 years old received oral and maxillofacial surgery and required postoperative nasal endotracheal intubation under overnight sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol. The dexmedetomidine group (group D) received dexmedetomidine 1.0 μg/kg intravenously for 10 minutes after entering the recovery room. The dose was maintained by giving an intravenous injection of dexmedetomidine 0.4 μg/kg. The injection rate could be modulated from 0.2 to 0.7 μg/kg/hour in the intensive care unit (ICU). If the Ramsay score was lower than 2 and involuntary limb movement occurred, other sedatives were used. The propofol group (group P) was given propofol 0.1 mg/kg intravenously for 10 minutes after entering the recovery room and then maintained with intravenous injections of propofol 1 to 2 mg/kg/hour in the recovery room and ICU. RESULTS: The oxygen desaturation of group P was higher than that of group D (at the first sedation time of 30 minutes), but the mean blood pressure of group P was significantly lower than that of group D at the 10-minute time point. The Ramsay score was higher in group D after the first 3 hours of sedation than in group P (P < .05). CONCLUSION:Dexmedetomidine showed similar safety and efficacy as propofol and could be used for tube-retaining sedation after oral and maxillofacial surgery.