Literature DB >> 25424589

A comparative study of dexmedetomidine and propofol as sole sedative agents for patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage undergoing diagnostic cerebral angiography.

Kamath Sriganesh1, Madhusudan Reddy2, Sritam Jena2, Mohit Mittal2, G S Umamaheswara Rao2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Subarachnoid hemorrhage is an acute neurological emergency requiring urgent confirmation of the diagnosis for planning definitive management. Due to altered consciousness, most patients require sedation for conducting this procedure smoothly. Currently, it is unclear if any one particular sedative drug has a favorable profile in patients undergoing cerebral angiography. The aim of this study was to compare the traditionally used sedative drug propofol with a newer alternative, dexmedetomidine, in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage undergoing cerebral angiography.
METHODS: Sixty adult patients with good grade subarachnoid hemorrhage undergoing diagnostic cerebral angiography were prospectively randomized to receive either propofol (n = 30) or dexmedetomidine (n = 30) following ethics committee approval and informed consent.
RESULTS: Compared to dexmadetomidine, propofol was associated with an earlier time for onset of sedation (2.3 ± 1.9 min vs. 15.4 ± 5.7 min; P < 0.001), but with an increased number of adverse respiratory events (11/30 vs 1/30; P = 0.003) and movement during the procedure (5/30 vs. 0/30; P = 0.05), necessitating additional supplementation of sedation (13/30 vs. 7/30; P = 0.17) and repetition of the imaging sequences. The total procedure time and time for recovery were similar for the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups, while the heart rate was lower in patients in the dexmedetomidine group.
CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine appears to be superior to propofol as a sole sedative agent for sedation during cerebral angiography in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25424589     DOI: 10.1007/s00540-014-1952-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anesth        ISSN: 0913-8668            Impact factor:   2.078


  15 in total

1.  A comparison of the sedative, hemodynamic, and respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol in children undergoing magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Ahmet Koroglu; Huseyin Teksan; Ozlem Sagir; Aytaç Yucel; Huseyin I Toprak; Ozcan M Ersoy
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.108

2.  A comparison of two sedation techniques for neuroradiology.

Authors:  M W Allan; A S Laurence; W J Gunawardena
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine in neurosurgical patients.

Authors:  Henry E Aryan; Kevin W Box; Dalia Ibrahim; Usha Desiraju; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  Brain Inj       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 2.311

4.  [Evaluation of 2 modalities of use of propofol in cerebral angiography].

Authors:  A Rossi; C Siani; J Zattoni; G Guiducci; T Capuzzo; G Ardizzone
Journal:  Minerva Anestesiol       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Cardiovascular response during cerebral angiography under general and local anaesthesia.

Authors:  D G Clayton; B M O'Donoghue; J E Stevens; P E Savage
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 6.955

6.  [Preoperative sedation with dexmedetomidine in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage].

Authors:  Kiyotaka Sato; Hideyuki Kamii; Hiroaki Shimizu; Masato Kato
Journal:  Masui       Date:  2006-01

7.  Sedation for neuroradiology revisited: comparison of three techniques for cerebral angiography.

Authors:  M A Bewlay; A S Laurence
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.330

8.  Dexmedetomidine causes prolonged recovery when compared with midazolam/fentanyl combination in outpatient shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  P Zeyneloglu; A Pirat; S Candan; S Kuyumcu; I Tekin; G Arslan
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2008-06-09       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  High dose dexmedetomidine as the sole sedative for pediatric MRI.

Authors:  Keira P Mason; David Zurakowski; Steven E Zgleszewski; Caroline D Robson; Maureen Carrier; Paul R Hickey; James A Dinardo
Journal:  Paediatr Anaesth       Date:  2008-03-18       Impact factor: 2.556

10.  Dexmedetomidine compared with propofol for pediatric sedation during cerebral angiography.

Authors:  Ke Peng; Jian Li; Fu-Hai Ji; Zhi Li
Journal:  J Res Med Sci       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.852

View more
  5 in total

1.  In reply: is dexmedetomidine really superior to propofol?

Authors:  Kamath Sriganesh; Madhusudan Reddy; G S Umamaheswara Rao
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2015-05-16       Impact factor: 2.078

2.  Is dexmedetomidine really superior to propofol?

Authors:  Sujoy Banik; Hemanshu Prabhakar
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 2.078

3.  Dexmedetomidine alleviates inflammatory response and oxidative stress injury of vascular smooth muscle cell via α2AR/GSK-3β/MKP-1/NRF2 axis in intracranial aneurysm.

Authors:  Ze Zhang; Xiue Mu; Xiaohui Zhou
Journal:  BMC Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2022-10-23       Impact factor: 2.605

4.  Effect of intraoperative infusion of dexmedetomidine on postoperative recovery in patients undergoing endovascular interventional therapies: A prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Chunguang Ren; Huiying Xu; Guangjun Xu; Lei Liu; Guoying Liu; Zongwang Zhang; Jun-Li Cao
Journal:  Brain Behav       Date:  2019-05-17       Impact factor: 2.708

5.  Comparative Evaluation of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol Along With Scalp Block on Haemodynamic and Postoperative Recovery for Chronic Subdural Haematoma Evacuation Under Monitored Anaesthesia Care.

Authors:  Vinit Kumar Srivastava; Sanjay Agrawal; Sanjay Kumar; Saima Khan; Sunil Sharma; Raj Kumar
Journal:  Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim       Date:  2018-02-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.