Protective effect of dexmedetomidine infusion combined with epidural blockade on postoperative complications after surgery: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective, randomized, controlled study aimed to explore the efficacy of dexmedetomidine combined with epidural blockade on postoperative recovery of elderly patients after radical resection for colorectal cancer.
METHODS: Ninety-six elderly patients who underwent radical resection for colorectal cancer were randomly divided into the following four groups: dexmedetomidine, epidural blockade (ropivacaine), combined (dexmedetomidine + epidural blockade), and control (0.9% saline). The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Ramsay scores at 48 hours, and time to first activity, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complication rates at 3 months were assessed.
RESULTS: Twelve hours after surgery, Ramsay scores were higher in the combined compared with the control and epidural blockade groups. Twenty-four hours after surgery, MMSE scores were higher in the combined compared with the other groups. The combined group showed the lowest VAS scores except at 48 hours. Time to first activity and length of hospital stay were significantly shorter in the combined compared with the other groups. There was no difference in total postoperative complication rates among the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: A combination of intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion and epidural blockade could mitigate pain after surgery, improve cognitive dysfunction in early surgery, and facilitate recovery.

RCT Entities:   Population Interventions Outcomes

Introduction

Global Cancer Statistics from 2018 showed that the overall incidence of colorectal cancer is 6.1%, and the overall mortality rate is 9.2%.[1] Colorectal cancer is the third most frequent cancer among men, and the second most frequent cancer and cause of cancer death among women.[1,2] It is estimated that there will be more than 1.8 million cases of patients with a new colorectal cancer diagnosis, and about 881,000 colorectal cancer patients died in 2018, which accounts for about 1 in 10 cancer cases and deaths.[1] In China, because of dietary and lifestyle changes, the incidence of colorectal cancer has increased dramatically, becoming the fifth leading cause of cancer-related death.[3-5] Currently, the major therapeutic method for colorectal cancer remains surgery.[6] Although postoperative pain management is the key component of perioperative care, most patients who undergo colonic surgery still have severe postoperative pain.[7,8] For elderly patients, early postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) also affects the postoperative recovery.[9] Dexmedetomidine, a type of α2-adrenergic receptor agonist, has been reported to have sedative, analgesic and anxiolytic properties.[10,11] Studies suggested that dexmedetomidine has been used for operative anesthesia and postoperative care in many types of surgery (e.g. scoliosis surgery,[12] sinus surgery,[13] and cardiac surgery patients.[14]) In some cases, dexmedetomidine is reported to improve the pain management, but also protect patients from early cognitive dysfunction.[15] Numerous studies showed the advantages of epidural blockade for both analgesia in common and orthopedic intraoperative and postoperative surgeries.[16,17] However, the effects of the combined use of intravenous dexmedetomidine and epidural blockade against analgesia after surgery, and early cognitive dysfunction in elderly patients with colorectal cancer after undergoing radical resection has been rarely discussed.

The objective of this research was to explore the effect of intravenous dexmedetomidine infusion combined with epidural blockade during surgery on the postoperative recovery of elderly patients after undergoing radical resection for colorectal cancer. This study might help to improve our understanding and provide evidence for the clinical use of combined preoperative intravenous dexmedetomidine infusion and epidural blockade.

Patients and methods

Experimental design

This study was approved by the ethics committee at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (No. 1901196-8). The trial was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No. ChiCTR1900021176). This study was conducted as a single center trial. It was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from each participant.

Patients

In this prospective randomized controlled trial, 96 elderly patients aged 65 years or older, who were diagnosed with colorectal cancer and who underwent radical resection between December 2018 and April 2019 at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center were recruited. All patients were diagnosed with colorectal cancer, which was confirmed by historical and pathological analysis. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores of all patients ranged from I to II. Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) was used to examine cognitive dysfunction in patients, and a 30-point questionnaire was also widely used in clinical and investigation settings to examine cognitive function before the surgery. Patients were excluded if they had coagulation disorders and other severe diseases (e.g. severe cardiac, liver, and renal diseases), distant metastasis, other cancers, other gastrointestinal diseases (e.g. esophageal regurgitation or peptic ulcer), or MMSE scores <23, or if they had taken other drugs such as acesodyne, sedatives, or antidepressant drugs within 2 weeks before the study. A flow chart for this study is shown in Figure 1. The surgery for all patients was conducted by the same team following the same protocol.

Figure 1.

Participant flow diagram.

Group allocation

All patients were randomly divided into four groups using a computer-generated random digital table. Group distribution was kept in a sealed envelope and opened before anesthesia was administered. The four groups included the following: 1) the dexmedetomidine group, in which the patients were injected with a loading dose of dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg · kg−1 (5 μL · kg−1) over 15 minutes during surgery, and then underwent an intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine at 0.6 μg · kg−1 hour−1 (6 μL · kg−1 hour−1) after anesthesia induction until 30 minutes before the end of surgery; 2) the epidural blockade group, in which the epidural blockade was performed by intermittent epidural injection of 0.25% ropivacaine; 3) the combined group, in which patients were treated with both intravenous dexmedetomidine and epidural blockade as described above; and 4) the control group, in which patients were injected with a loading dose of saline 0.9% at 5 μL · kg−1 over 15 minutes during the surgery followed by an intravenous infusion of saline 0.9% at 6 μL · kg−1 hour−1 after anesthesia induction until 30 minutes before the end of the surgery. Postoperative follow-ups were performed by anesthetists who did not know the group allocation.

Analgesia strategies and interventions

After the patients entered the operating room, they underwent standard examinations including pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2), electrocardiogram, and noninvasive blood pressure monitoring (GE Datex-Ohmeda S/5, Anaesthesia Monitor, Helsinki, Finland). The depth of calmness was detected by electrodes using the bispectral index (BIS, Aspect Medical Systems, Inc., Norwood, MA, USA) by placing the electrodes on the side of the patient’s forehead.

For epidural blockade, epidural puncture was performed at the position of the T10 to T11 gap, and 3 mL of 2% lidocaine was injected as test dose before the anesthesia induction. This was followed by injection of 5-mL boluses of 0.25% ropivacaine. The ropivacaine dose was mainly based on our previous clinical experience. Time intervals of ropivacaine injection were 50 minutes. The total volume of 0.25% ropivacaine injection during the surgery was 14 to 18 mL. The block level was primarily determined by pricking the patient’s skin. When the skin pain disappeared, epidural blockade was considered to be successful.

For all patients, the analgesia induction was performed by intravenous injection of 0.03 mg · kg−1 midazolam, 1.5 mg · kg−1 propofol, 0.3 μg · kg−1 sufentanil, and 0.6 mg · kg−1 rocuronium, and then the patients underwent endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. Patients were administered an effective concentration target-controlled infusion of propofol based on Schnider’s pharmacokinetic model[18] and remifentanil based on Minto’s model,[19] which were delivered using an infusion pump (Infusomat® Space, B. Braun, Tuttlingen, Germany). Effective concentration of propofol was 2 to 6 μg · mL−1. The effect site concentration of remifentanil was 1 to 8 ng · mL−1. BIS values were maintained at 40 to 55 to minimize intraoperative awareness for all groups. Average blood pressure was maintained within ±30% of the pre-induction value. If the average blood pressure was lower than 30%, ephedrine was administered. Rocuronium (0.1–0.2 mg · kg−1) was administered during maintenance at the anesthesiologist’s discretion. Nasopharyngeal temperature was maintained between 36 and 37.5°C.

For dexmedetomidine, patients were injected with a loading dose of dexmedetomidine (0.5 μg · kg−1) over 15 minutes during the surgery and then they received an infusion of 0.6 μg · kg−1 hour−1 after anesthesia induction until 30 minutes before the end of surgery. For the control group, a bolus and infusion of 0.9% saline of an equivalent volume was administered intravenously.

At the start of skin closure time, the analgesia pump was connected. The postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) pump (automatic electronic drug injection pump ZZB- II type, Jiangsu AI Peng Medical Equipment Co., Ltd., China) was used for each patient. Each patient received an intravenous injection of 0.06 μg/kg of sufentanil before connecting the analgesia pump. The drugs in the PCIA pump included sufentanil citrate (0.03 μg · kg−1hour−1), 100 mg of flurbiprofen Axetil, 8 mg of ondansetron, and 0.9% physiological saline (200 mL). Analgesia pump parameters were as follows: 3 mL/hour background flow, 3 mL of PCA, and 10 minute lockout time with a maximum of 9 mL/hour. If the patient’s Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for pain at rest was >4 during follow-up, the patient was given 3 mL of the analgesia pump liquid. After surgery, the catheter was left in place for 1 to 3 days for all patients, with the mean duration of 1.93 ± 0.83 days.

Data collection

Demographic data and clinical data, such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), ASA stage, pathological type, and mean operative time, were collected. The MMSE and Ramsay scores were assessed at 4, 12, 24, and 48 hours after surgery. The pain degree was detected at 2, 12, 24, and 48 hours after surgery based on an 11-point numerical VAS (0 = no pain, 10 = most severe pain). A mean MMSE score decline was >2 points between postoperative and preoperative surgery for the POCD was considered to be a significant difference.[20] The POCD occurrence ratio was recorded at 7 days after surgery. In addition, we recorded the number of times that the patient self-administered PCIA within 48 hours, number of times that rescue analgesia was used during the first 48 hours after surgery, time to first activity (leaving bed) for patients, time to first bowel movement, length of hospital stay, and the complications within 3 months after surgery. All the patients were followed up for 3 months.

Statistical analysis

The sample size was calculated based on our early experiments with a difference of 28% in the incidence of POCD 7 days after surgery for elderly patients who underwent radical resection for colorectal cancer at our hospital. Given a confidence level of 95% and a statistical power of 80%, the sample size was determined to be 24 in each group. To account for the dropout rate, we planned to recruit 112 patients.

Measurement data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD). Counting materials were compared using the Chi-square test. The comparison among three or more groups was conducted using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by a post hoc test using the Bonferroni correction. P-values that were less than 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. All calculations were performed using SPSS version 20.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

Results

Basic clinical information for all patients

This study recruited 96 patients who underwent radical colorectal cancer resection at our hospital, with 24 patients in each group (Table 1). There were no differences in age, gender, BMI, ASA grade, mean operative time, and the amount of bleeding in all groups.

Table 1.

Baseline clinical information for patients.

Variable	Dexmedetomidine, n = 24	Epidural blockade, n = 24	Combined, n = 24	Control, n = 24	p-Value
Mean age, years	69.6 ± 4.4	69.3 ± 4.4	68.5 ± 4.2	68.6 ± 3.9	0.732*
Gender, male: female	15: 9	14: 10	15: 9	13: 11	0.924#
BMI, kg/m2	21.8 ± 2.5	21.5 ± 2.9	23.2 ± 2.3	22.6 ± 2.8	0.110*
ASA stage, n (%)
I	4	5	3	4	0.896#
II	20	19	21	20
Mean operative time, minutes	141.0 ± 23.5	152.1 ± 22.7	146.0 ± 21.0	144.8 ± 24.7	0.409*
Bleeding, mL	97.7 ± 21.9	106.2 ± 19.0	100.7 ± 20.7	99.2 ± 19.0	0.497*

*: Mean ± SD: one-way analysis of variance, #: Chi-square test.

BMI, body mass index; ASA, American Society of Anesthesiologists; SD, standard deviation.

Pain conditions and Ramsay scores

The Ramsay scores were significantly higher in the combined group compared with the control group and the epidural blockade group at 12 hours after surgery (P < 0.05, Table 2). The Ramsay scores showed no significant different in all the groups at 48 hours. The combined group, compared with other groups, had the lowest VAS scores at all the time points except at 48 hours (Table 2), and the lowest number of times that PCIA was self-administered within 48 hours after surgery (P < 0.05, Table 3). The quantity of rescue analgesia during 48 hours after surgery in the combined group was significantly lower compared with the control group (P < 0.05, Table 3).

Table 2.

VAS and Ramsay scores 48 hours after surgery.

Variables	Time points (hours)	Dexmedetomidine, n = 24	Epidural blockade, n = 24	Combined, n = 24	Control, n = 24	p-Value*
VAS	2	3.0 ± 1.0c,d	3.1 ± 1.3c,d	1.8 ± 0.7a,b,d	5.4 ± 1.9a,b,c	<0.001
	12	2.8 ± 0.6d	2.9 ± 0.7d	2.5 ± 0.7d	4.1 ± 0.9a,b,c	<0.001
	24	2.1 ± 0.4c,d	2.1 ± 0.4c,d	1.5 ± 0.2a,b,d	2.9 ± 0.8a,b,c	<0.001
	48	1.3 ± 0.5	1.2 ± 0.5	1.3 ± 0.4	1.4 ± 0.4	0.167
Ramsay	4	1.8 ± 0.8d	1.3 ± 0.5c	2.3 ± 1.1b,d	1.1 ± 0.3a,c	<0.001
	12	1.9 ± 0.8	1.4 ± 0.6c	2.5 ± 0.8b,d	1.3 ± 0.5c	<0.001
	24	2.0 ± 0.8	1.7 ± 0.8	2.3 ± 0.9d	1.6 ± 0.7 c	0.015
	48	2.0 ± 0.4	2.0 ± 0.6	2.3 ± 0.7	1.9 ± 0.5	0.257

*: Mean  ±  SD: one-way analysis of variance. aP < 0.05, compared with the dexmedetomidine group; bP < 0.05, compared with epidural blockade group; cP < 0.05, compared with combined group; dP < 0.05, compared with control group.

VAS, Visual Analog Score; SD, standard deviation.

Table 3.

Number of times PICA was self-administered and rescue analgesia in 48 hours after surgery.

	Dexmedetomidine, n = 24	Epidural blockade, n = 24	Combined, n = 24	Control, n = 24	p-Value
Number of times PICA was self-administered in 48 hours after surgery	4.9 ± 1.4c,d	5.1 ± 1.6c,d	3.2 ± 1.3a,b,d	7.6 ± 1.7a,b,c	<0.001*
Number of times rescue analgesia was administered in 48 hours after surgery, n (%)	3 (12.5%)	4 (16.7%)	1 (4.2%)d	6 (25%)c	0.041#

*: Mean ± SD: one-way analysis of variance,#: Chi-square test. aP < 0.05, compared with the dexmedetomidine group; bP < 0.05, compared with epidural blockade group; cP < 0.05, compared with combined group; dP < 0.05, compared with control group.

PICA, patient-controlled intravenous analgesia; SD, standard deviation.

MMSE scores and POCD incidence

At 24 hours after surgery, the MMSE scores were significantly higher in the combined group compared with the other groups (P < 0.05, Table 4). The MMSE scores were significantly higher in the combined group compared with the control group and the epidural blockade group at 48 hours after surgery (P < 0.05). The incidences of POCD at 7 days after surgery in the dexmedetomidine group, the epidural blockade group, the combined group, and the control group were 20.8%, 29.2%, 12.5%, and 29.2%, respectively (Table 4).

Table 4.

MMSE scores of different groups.

Variables	Time points	Dexmedetomidine n = 24	Epidural blockade n = 24	Combined n = 24	Control n = 24	p-Value*
MMSE	Before surgery	27.3 ± 2.1	28.1 ± 1.7	27.8 ± 1.9	27.9 ± 1.8	0.527
	4 hours after surgery	22.7 ± 1.8c,d	21.3 ± 2.2c	25.3 ± 2.4a,b,d	20.1 ± 2.3a,c	<0.001
	12 hours after surgery	24.0 ± 1.6c,d	22.2 ± 2.2c	26.3 ± 1.8a,b,d	22.0 ± 1.8a,c	<0.001
	24 hours after surgery	25.9 ± 1.8b,c	23.7 ± 1.9a,c	27.5 ± 1.3a,b,d	24.1 ± 1.9c	<0.001
	48 hours after surgery	26.4 ± 1.9	24.9 ± 1.9c	27.6 ± 1.9b,d	25.0 ± 2.4c	<0.001
	7 days after surgery	26.7 ± 2.1	25.5 ± 1.6c	27.2 ± 1.6b,d	25.5 ± 2.1c	0.006

*: Mean  ±  SD: one-way analysis of variance. aP<0.05, compared with the dexmedetomidine group; bP<0.05, compared with epidural blockade group; cP<0.05, compared with combined group; dP<0.05, compared with control group.

MMSE, mini-mental state examination; SD, standard deviation.

Clinical recovery outcomes

To clarify the effect of dexmedetomidine and epidural blockade on the patients’ recovery in the different groups, the time to the first activity (leaving bed), the time to the first bowel movement, and the length of hospital stay were recorded and analyzed. Results suggested that all indexes of the time to the first activity (leaving bed), time to the first bowel movement, and length of hospital stay in the combined group were all significantly shorter compared with the other groups, while the control group showed the highest values (P < 0.05, Table 5).

Table 5.

Clinical outcomes.

Variable	Dexmedetomidine, n = 24	Epidural blockade, n = 24	Combined, n = 24	Control, n = 24	p-Value*
Time to first out-of-bed activity (hours)	41.3 ± 4.0c,d	41.4 ± 3.9c,d	37.8 ± 2.8a,b,d	53.9 ± 4.4a,b,c	<0.001
Time to first bowel movement (hours)	42.7 ± 3.6c,d	43.0 ± 3.7c,d	38.5 ± 2.2a,b,d	53.0 ± 4.4a,b,c	<0.001
Length of hospital stay (days)	10.6 ± 2.1c	10.3 ± 1.8c,d	7.6 ± 2.0a,b,d	12.2 ± 3.2b,c	<0.001

*: Mean ± SD: one-way analysis of variance. aP < 0.05, compared with the dexmedetomidine group; bP < 0.05, compared with epidural blockade group; cP < 0.05, compared with combined group; dP < 0.05, compared with control group.

SD, standard deviation.

Complications in different patient groups

The postoperative complications were investigated in all groups. Total postoperative complication rates in all groups showed no significant difference (Table 6).

Table 6.

Complications in different patient groups.

Complication, n (%)	Dexmedetomidine, n = 24	Epidural blockade, n = 24	Combined, n = 24	Control, n = 24	p-Value[#]
Total complication rate	4 (16.7%)	5 (20.8%)	4 (16.7%)	5 (20.8%)	0.965
Lower extremities motor sensation disorder	0	1 (4.2%)	1 (4.2%)	1 (4.2%)	0.793
Nausea	2 (8.3%)	1 (4.2%)	1 (4.2%)	1 (4.2%)	0.889
Dizziness	1 (4.2%)	1 (4.2%)	1 (4.2%)	0	0.793
Vomiting	0	0	1 (4.2%)	1 (4.2%)	0.564
Urinary retention	0	1 (4.2%)	0	1 (4.2%)	0.564
Ileus	1 (4.2%)	1 (4.2%)	0	1 (4.2%)	0.793

#: Chi-square test.

Discussion

Despite the wide application of either intravenous dexmedetomidine infusion or epidural blockade in analgesia and anesthesia that is used for many kinds of surgeries, clinical evidence for the combined use of these two methods is lacking. To the best of our knowledge, the combined use of intravenous dexmedetomidine infusion and epidural blockade in radical resection for colorectal cancer and its protective effects against postoperative pain and early cognitive dysfunction have been rarely reported. In this study, we used dexmedetomidine infusion and epidural blockade with 0.25% ropivacaine injection to improve postoperative recovery. We demonstrated, for the first time, that the combined use of intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion and epidural blockade could mitigate pain after surgery, ameliorate the early stage of cognitive dysfunction, and facilitate the recovery of patients after undergoing radical resection for colorectal cancer, but this anesthesia approach did not affect postoperative complications. This study protocol may provide a novel method for improving the early stage of cognitive dysfunction after surgery in elderly patients.

In our study, we used MMSE to determine the patients’ cognitive function. MMSE is a composite measurement method for widely determining POCD; about 21% studies used this method according to Tsai et al.’s review.[21] Most of these studies showed that the MMSE score decreased in subjects who were diagnosed POCD.

Epidural anesthesia has been widely used in many surgeries. Heinrich et al.[22] found in esophageal cancer surgery, patients without epidural anesthesia had significantly increased postoperative median opioid consumption and duration of hospitalization in the intensive care unit. Onan et al.[23] reported that anesthesia in a thoracic epidural could significantly reduce the intensity of postoperative pain and analgesic consumption in the early postoperative period after coronary artery bypass grafting. It was also verified that combined epidural and general anesthesia resulted in better pain management, less bleeding, and a lower stress response in major spinal surgery.[24] However, the effect of epidural anesthesia against early postoperative cognitive dysfunction has been rarely discussed. In the present study, we found that epidural anesthesia could lead to better pain control, and we also demonstrated that epidural anesthesia had no influence on recovery from early POCD.

A few studies reported that dexmedetomidine could act as sedative, analgesic, and anxiolytic drug. Cheung et al.[25] demonstrated that intraoperative dexmedetomidine in colorectal surgery could decrease the resting pain scores, whereas it did not affect the patients’ recovery outcome. Lu et al.[20] showed that the combination of parecoxib pretreatment and perioperative dexmedetomidine administration could decrease the POCD incidence. An animal study also found that dexmedetomidine could improve the early postoperative cognitive function in aged mice.[26] Han et al.[27] demonstrated that intravenous administration of dexmedetomidine at a dose of 10 mg · kg−1 postoperatively improved POCD in pediatric patients. The incidence of postoperative delirium will be decreased by sedative dexmedetomidine during the surgery as a supplement to peripheral nerve block. In this study, dexmedetomidine was also shown to improve pain control and early postoperative cognitive function, which is consistent with the previous studies.[25-27] Additionally, we showed for the first time that the combined use of epidural anesthesia and intravenous dexmedetomidine infusion during the surgery mitigated patients’ postoperative agitation and improved pain control, cognitive conditions, and postoperative recovery of the patients who underwent radical resection for colorectal cancer compared with the dexmedetomidine only.

The combined use of epidural anesthesia and intravenous dexmedetomidine infusion during the surgery might have an additive effect. The improved early cognitive conditions and low incidence of POCD in the combined group in this study is associated with a protective effect of dexmedetomidine and reduced postoperative pain. POCD is relevant to acute pain after surgery. Previous research showed that the incidence of postoperative delirium[28] and POCD[20] would be high when more opioid drugs were used for more severe pain after surgery. The postoperative infusion of dexmedetomidine combined with epidural block in this study could enhance the analgesic effect and decrease the quantity of opioid that is used. However, there was no obvious difference in pain control and postoperative recovery between the dexmedetomidine and epidural blockade groups.

There are some limitations in this research. First, patients’ cognitive function was observed for only 7 days. The study would have benefitted from longer-term follow-up of the patients. Second, to ensure that the surgeries were performed by the same team using the same protocol, this was a single center study. Finally, epidural analgesia was not used for the epidural blockade group to reduce interference factors. Intraoperative and postoperative use of epidural anesthesia and analgesia might lead to different results.

In conclusion, we conducted a prospective randomized controlled study to investigate the combined use of epidural blockade and parecoxib in postoperative recovery of CRC patients. Results showed that the combination of epidural blockade and parecoxib could enhance the recovery process, as well as reduce the pain for the CRC patients. These results may provide more clinical evidence for application of epidural blockade and parecoxib in postoperative recovery strategy for CRC patients.