Lidocaine versus Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to General Anesthesia for patients undergoing Elective Abdominopelvic Surgeries | ||
| International Journal of Medical Arts | ||
| Article 14, Volume 2, Issue 2, April 2020, Pages 427-435 PDF (319.21 K) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/ijma.2020.23550.1096 | ||
| Author | ||
| Sameh Seyam* | ||
| Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Egypt; Mustasharak Hospital, Khamis Mushayt, Asir province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia [KSA]. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Background: The fundamental impact of dexmedetomidine on the cardiovascular framework obstruction is the extra component of narcotic saving impact. Similarly, fundamental Lidocaine that is utilized as a consistent mixture during the operation period has pain-relieving, antihyperalgesic, and calming chattels. Aim of the work: To analyze the effectiveness of lidocaine given intravenously with that of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to general anesthesia for candidates listed for elective abdominal and pelvic surgery. Patients and Methods:120 patients of both sexes undergoing elective pelviabdominal procedures were enlisted. Patients were assigned randomly to one of three equal groups: group 1 received a loading lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg, followed by an infusion of 2 mg/kg/h, group 2 received a loading dexmedetomidine1 μg/kg, followed by 0.5 μg/kg/h, and group 3 received normal saline 0.9% in the same design as previous medicines. Hemodynamics, consumption of anesthetic agents, induction and recovery times, and time to the first postoperative analgesic request were reported. Results: The hemodynamics after intubation and in the next records, were significantly lower in groups 1 and 2 when compared with group 3 with no significant variance between groups 2 and 1. The induction dosage of propofol, mean end-tidal sevoflurane concentration and the consumption of fentanyl intraoperatively were significantly lower in group 2 when compared with group 1. The time through anesthesia induction was significantly lower in group 1 and 2 when compared with group 3. The time to the first analgesic demand postoperatively was significantly longer in group 2 when compared with group 1. Conclusion: Both lidocaine and dexmedetomidine could be a beneficial adjuvant to general anesthesia. Though, dexmedetomidine has a much economic effect on intraoperative anesthetic agent consumption and more extended time to the first postoperative analgesic request. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Abdominopelvic surgeries; General Anesthesia; Dexmedetomidine; Lidocaine; Adjuvant | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 545 PDF Download: 357 |
||
