Literature DB >> 27977600

Evaluation of dexmedetomidine in combination with sufentanil or butorphanol for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic resection of gastrointestinal tumors: A quasi-experimental trial.

Xue-Kang Zhang1, Qiu-Hong Chen, Wen-Xiang Wang, Qian Hu.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine in combination with sufentanil or butorphanol for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic resection of a gastrointestinal tumor.This quasi-experimental trial was conducted in Nanchang, China, from January 2014 to December 2015. Eighty patients (age 27-70 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II) undergoing laparoscopic resection of a gastrointestinal tumor were randomized into 4 groups and offered intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for pain control after surgery. The patients received sufentanil 2.0 μg/kg in combination with dexmedetomidine 1.5 μg/kg (group S1) or 2.0 μg/kg (group S2), or butorphanol 0.15 mg/kg in combination with dexmedetomidine 1.5 0 μg/kg (group N1) or 2.0 μg/kg (group N2). Oxygen saturation, mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate, visual analog scale score, and Ramsay sedation score were recorded at enrollment (T0), at extubation (T1), and 4 (T2), 8 (T3), 12 (T4), 24 (T5), and 48 (T6) hours thereafter. Side effects and satisfaction scores were evaluated after surgery.MAP increased in all groups at T1 but not significantly so when compared with T0. Heart rate decreased significantly in group S2 when compared with the other groups at T1-T5 (P < 0.05). MAP decreased significantly in group S2 when compared with group S1 at T4-T6 (P < 0.05). MAP increased significantly in group N1 when compared with group N2 at T4-T5 (P < 0.05). There was a statistically significant decrease in mean visual analog scale score in group S2 when compared with group S1 at T2 (P < 0.05) and group N2 at T1-T2 (P < 0.05). Two patients in group S1 had vomiting. There were no reports of drowsiness, respiratory depression, or other complications. The satisfaction score was higher in group S2 than in the other groups.Dexmedetomidine in combination with sufentanil or butorphanol can be used safely and effectively for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic resection of a gastrointestinal tumor. The combination of dexmedetomidine 2.0 μg/kg and sufentanil is particularly beneficial in these patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27977600      PMCID: PMC5268046          DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000005604

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)        ISSN: 0025-7974            Impact factor:   1.889


Introduction

Sufentanil and butorphanol are often used for postoperative analgesia. Sufentanil alone is more likely to cause side effects and respiratory depression than when combined with 1 or more adjunctive drugs in intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA).[ Further, it has been reported that lower doses of butorphanol may have ceiling effects.[ Effective postoperative analgesia would not only improve patient satisfaction but also reduce the incidence of postoperative complications and shorten the duration of hospitalization.[ According to the available protocols for postoperative pain management, the ideal method is a combination of drugs. Previous studies have reported that use of an α2-adrenoceptor agonist can decrease the risk of cardiovascular side effects postoperatively. Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective α2 adrenergic receptor agonist with sedative, analgesic, and antianxiety activity.[ However, data on the effects of different concentrations of dexmedetomidine are inadequate. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine in combination with sufentanil or butorphanol for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic resection of a gastrointestinal tumor.

Methods

Study design and participants

Eighty patients (41 men, 39 women, aged 27–70 years) with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I to II and a body mass index < 28 kg/m2 undergoing laparoscopic resection of a gastrointestinal tumor were included. The study exclusion criteria included a history of cardiovascular disease, severe renal or hepatic insufficiency, bradycardia, atrioventricular block, chronic pain, and current use of analgesic medication. The patients were randomized into 4 groups of 20 patients each using a computer-generated randomization list to receive dexmedetomidine 1.5 μg/kgand sufentanil 2.0 μg/kg and ondansetron 0.4 mg/kg, diluted with 0.9% saline solution to 100 mL (group S1); dexmedetomidine 2.0 μg/kg and sufentanil 2.0 μg/kg and ondansetron 0.4 mg/kg, diluted with 0.9% saline solution to 100 mL (group S2); dexmedetomidine 1.5 μg/kg and butorphanol 0.15 mg/kg and ondansetron 0.4 mg/kg, diluted with 0.9% saline solution to 100 mL (group N1); and dexmedetomidine 2.0 μg/kg and butorphanol 0.15 mg/kg and ondansetron 0.4 mg/kg, diluted with 0.9% saline solution to 100 mL (group N2).

Anesthesia

The patients did not receive any medication before induction of anesthesia. At the start of anesthesia, peripheral venous access was established in the right upper extremity, and a 5-lead electrocardiogram, oxygen saturation (SpO2), and blood pressure were monitored continuously. Anesthesia was induced by an intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine 1.0 μg/kg (15 minutes before the start of surgery), etomidate 0.3 mg/kg, sufentanil 0.4 μg/kg, and cisatracurium 0.2 mg/kg. When the trachea was intubated, ventilation was mechanically controlled to maintain a tidal volume of 7 to 10 mL/kg, a respiratory rate of 12 breath/min, and end-tidal carbon dioxide (PETCO2) at 35 to 45 mm Hg. Anesthesia was maintained by an intravenous infusion of propofol 4.0 to 8.0 mg/kg/min, remifentanil 4.0 to 8.0 μg/kg/min, and cisatracurium 0.1 mg/kg/min. Hemodynamic stability was maintained intraoperatively. All patients received an intravenous injection of flurbiprofen axetil 50 mg and ondansetron 4 mg 15 minutes before completion of surgery. Propofol, remifentanil, and cisatracurium were then discontinued. All patients were offered an electronic infusion pump for intravenous PCA after surgery.

Outcome measures

Oxygen saturation, mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), visual analog score (VAS), and Ramsay sedation score (RSS) were recorded at enrollment (T0), at extubation (T1), and at 4 (T2), 8 (T3), 12 (T4), 24 (T5), and 48 (T6) hours thereafter. Side effects and satisfaction scores were evaluated after surgery. The VAS score was classified as no pain (score 0), mild pain (score 1–3), moderate pain (score 4–6), or severe pain (score 7–10). Sedation was assessed using the RSS (1, anxious; 2, cooperative and tranquil; 3, responding to command; 4, brisk response to stimulus; 5, sluggish response to stimulus; 6, no response to stimulus).

Ethics statement

The study protocol was approved by the local hospital ethics committee in Nanchang, China, and conducted from January 2014 to December 2015. Informed consent was obtained from all study participants.

Statistical analysis

Normally distributed data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation. Between-group comparisons were performed using repeated-measures analysis of variance. Categorical variables were compared using the Chi-squared test, and intragroup comparisons were performed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. All P values < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. The statistical analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 17.0 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).

Results

The patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1. There was no difference in patient sex, age, or weight, or duration of surgery between the study groups (P > 0.05). MAP increased in all groups at T1 when compared with T0, but the difference was not statistically significant (Table 2). HR decreased significantly in group S2 at T1–T5 when compared with the other groups (P < 0.05). MAP decreased significantly in group S2 when compared with group S1 at T4–T6 (P < 0.05) and increased significantly in group N1 when compared with group N2 at T4–T5 (P < 0.05). A statistically significant decrease in VAS was seen in group S2 when compared with group S1 at T2 (P < 0.05) and with group N2 at T1–T2 (P < 0.05; Table 3). Two patients in group S1 developed vomiting. There were no reports of drowsiness, respiratory depression, or other complications in any of the groups (Table 4). The patient satisfaction rate was higher in group S2 (95%) than in the other groups (Table 5).
Table 1

Patient characteristics in the treatment groups.

Table 2

Comparison of hemodynamic changes in the treatment groups at the different time points.

Table 3

Comparison of visual analog score and Ramsay sedation score between the treatment groups at the different time points.

Table 4

Side effects in the treatment groups.

Table 5

Comparison of patient satisfaction levels between the treatment groups.

Patient characteristics in the treatment groups. Comparison of hemodynamic changes in the treatment groups at the different time points. Comparison of visual analog score and Ramsay sedation score between the treatment groups at the different time points. Side effects in the treatment groups. Comparison of patient satisfaction levels between the treatment groups.

Discussion

Postoperative pain is a common patient complaint after surgery. Apfelbaum et al[ reported that approximately 80% of their patients experienced pain after surgery and 86% had moderate to severe pain. Although postoperative pain is significantly less after laparoscopy than after open surgery,[ the pain may still be considerable because of the transabdominal sutures and laparoscopic tacks used during the procedure.[ Medication patches and percutaneous pump devices have been used to decrease postoperative pain with limited success, so improving postoperative analgesia is an area of continued interest in laparoscopic surgery. The most common type of PCA involves use of an intravenous opioid because of its postoperative analgesic efficacy and prolonged duration of action.[ However, this type of PCA has considerable side effects, including nausea, vomiting, motor block, urinary retention, and respiratory depression.[ Use of sufentanil has been investigated in some laparoscopic surgery studies. Damen et al[ reported that intraoperative sufentanil was comparable with remifentanil in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Early pain was decreased in patients receiving sufentanil, but at the expense of opioid-related adverse effects. Butorphanol is a lipid-soluble narcotic agent with strong κ-receptor agonist and weak μ-receptor agonist/antagonist activity. The above-mentioned narcotic analgesics have been used frequently for postoperative analgesia.[ In recent years, there have been attempts to reduce the frequency of side effects associated with postoperative pain management by use of a combination of two or more drugs.[ Recent studies have focused on nonopioid receptors with additional analgesic effects. Previous studies have demonstrated that dexmedetomidine, an α2-adrenoceptor agonist, causes dose-dependent hypotension, bradycardia, and sedation. Dexmedetomidine decreases the HR and blood pressure by decreasing plasma levels of norepinephrine and epinephrine.[ Saadawy et al[ reported a decrease in HR and MAP in their dexmedetomidine group within 25 to 35 minutes of caudal administration. In our study, we also found a decrease in HR and MAP, particularly in the group that received dexmedetomidine 2.0 μg/kg. Further, MAP decreased significantly in the group that received dexmedetomidine 2.0 μg/kg and sufentanil 2.0 μg/kg when compared with the other groups. Addition of dexmedetomidine 2.0 μg/kg to sufentanil or butorphanol in this study was not associated with an increased incidence of side effects. Our results are consistent with those of studies in patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. In one early study, patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery who received intraoperative dexmedetomidine reported lower pain scores during the first 12 postoperative hours, and no opioid-sparing effect was found.[ Dexmedetomidine also showed significant anxiolytic efficacy and durable analgesic efficacy, with a decreased need for postoperative opioid analgesia. Our study found that satisfactory patient sedation contributed to the lessening of postoperative pain. Our results indicated that patients were generally satisfied with their intravenous PCA system because the adjuvant combination of dexmedetomidine and sufentanil or butorphanol therein achieved an acceptable level of sedation. In conclusion, our results show that the 2 doses of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to sufentanil and butorphanol can be safely used for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic resection of a gastrointestinal tumor. The most effective dose of dexmedetomidine that did not lead to any complications was 2.0 μg/kg combined with sufentanil 2.0 μg/kg.

Acknowledgment

We would like to express our gratitude to our coworkers and the patients who participated in this study. This study is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81660096).
  19 in total

1.  Postoperative analgesia after anterior correction of thoracic scoliosis: a prospective randomized study comparing continuous double epidural catheter technique with intravenous morphine.

Authors:  Stephan Blumenthal; Alain Borgeat; Marco Nadig; Kan Min
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  The effects of intra-operative dexmedetomidine on postoperative pain, side-effects and recovery in colorectal surgery.

Authors:  C W Cheung; Q Qiu; A C L Ying; S W Choi; W L Law; M G Irwin
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 6.955

3.  Laparoscopic-Assisted Transversus Abdominis Plane Block for Postoperative Pain Control in Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Adam C Fields; Dani O Gonzalez; Edward H Chin; Scott Q Nguyen; Linda P Zhang; Celia M Divino
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 6.113

4.  Effect of dexmedetomidine on the characteristics of bupivacaine in a caudal block in pediatrics.

Authors:  I Saadawy; A Boker; M A Elshahawy; A Almazrooa; S Melibary; A A Abdellatif; W Afifi
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  2008-12-06       Impact factor: 2.105

5.  Effect of dexmedetomidine combined with sufentanil for post-caesarean section intravenous analgesia: a randomised, placebo-controlled study.

Authors:  Yuyan Nie; Yuqi Liu; Qingyan Luo; Shaoqiang Huang
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.330

6.  Combination of low doses of intrathecal ketamine and midazolam with bupivacaine improves postoperative analgesia in orthopaedic surgery.

Authors:  T Murali Krishna; N B Panda; Y K Batra; S Rajeev
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2007-09-25       Impact factor: 4.330

7.  Postoperative pain experience: results from a national survey suggest postoperative pain continues to be undermanaged.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Apfelbaum; Connie Chen; Shilpa S Mehta; Tong J Gan
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 5.108

8.  Nonrespiratory side effects of epidural morphine.

Authors:  P R Bromage; E M Camporesi; P A Durant; C H Nielsen
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  1982-06       Impact factor: 5.108

Review 9.  Laparoscopic surgery: a narrative review of pharmacotherapy in pain management.

Authors:  Sari Sjövall; Merja Kokki; Hannu Kokki
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 9.546

10.  Postoperative pain relief with epidural buprenorphine versus epidural butorphanol in laparoscopic hysterectomies: A comparative study.

Authors:  Dona Elsa Jose; P Ganapathi; N G Anish Sharma; P Shankaranarayana; D S Aiyappa; Mohammed Nazim
Journal:  Anesth Essays Res       Date:  2016 Jan-Apr
View more
  9 in total

1.  Effect of nalbuphine on patient controlled intravenous analgesia after radical resection of colon cancer.

Authors:  Qi Jiang; Rongfang Zhang; Tao Liu
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 2.967

2.  Postoperative delirium after long-term general anesthesia in elderly patients, how to reduce it?: Protocol of a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  Xiaoyuan Sui; Qingmei Duan; Kunling Liu; Cuicui Li
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 1.817

3.  Efficacy and safety of remifentanil for analgesia in cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Xuan Zhou; Lian-Jin Jin; Chun-Yang Hu; Meng Chen; Ying Li; Yue-Shun Zhang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 1.817

4.  Effects of Additional Intraoperative Administration of Sufentanil on Postoperative Pain, Stress and Inflammatory Responses in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Lian Liu; Bingyu Li; Quan Cao; Bo Zhao; Wenwei Gao; Yuan Chen; Shihua Yu
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 3.133

5.  Comparison of Sufentanil- and Fentanyl-based Intravenous Patient-controlled Analgesia on Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting after Laparoscopic Nephrectomy: A Prospective, Double-blind, Randomized-controlled Trial.

Authors:  Hye-Mi Lee; Hae Keum Kil; Bon Nyeo Koo; Min Sup Song; Jin Ha Park
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 3.738

6.  Dexmedetomidine versus propofol sedation in flexible bronchoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Barak Pertzov; Boris Krasulya; Karam Azem; Yael Shostak; Shimon Izhakian; Dror Rosengarten; Svetlana Kharchenko; Mordechai R Kramer
Journal:  BMC Pulm Med       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 3.317

7.  Effect of dexmedetomidine in the prophylactic endoscopic injection sclerotherapy for oesophageal varices: a study protocol for prospective interventional study.

Authors:  Hiroki Nishikawa; Yoshinori Iwata; Akio Ishii; Hirayuki Enomoto; Yukihisa Yuri; Noriko Ishii; Yuho Miyamoto; Kunihiro Hasegawa; Chikage Nakano; Ryo Takata; Takashi Nishimura; Kazunori Yoh; Nobuhiro Aizawa; Yoshiyuki Sakai; Naoto Ikeda; Tomoyuki Takashima; Hiroko Iijima; Shuhei Nishiguchi
Journal:  BMJ Open Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-06-01

8.  Dexmedetomidine Combined With Butorphanol or Sufentanil for the Prevention of Post-operative Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Undergoing Microvascular Decompression: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Guangjun Xu; Jing Zhao; Zunyuan Liu; Guoying Liu; Lei Liu; Chunguang Ren; Yanchao Liu
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2020-10-30

Review 9.  Efficacy and Safety of Butorphanol Use in Patient-Controlled Analgesia: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Zhihua Zhu; Wenyu Zhang
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2021-07-23       Impact factor: 2.629

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.