What is it about?

Comparison of Intravenous Lignocaine and Dexmedetomidine for Attenuation of Hemodynamic Stress

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Objectives: To compare the safety and efficacy of lignocaine versus dexmedetomidine in attenuation of cardiovascular response to laryngoscopy. Study design: Randomized controlled trial. Sixtypatients of ASA I & II category posted for elective surgery under general Anesthesia were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly divided into two Groups: Group L(Lignocaine ) and Group D (Dexmedetomidine) with 30 patients in each group. Materials and Methods: Group L received 1.5 mg/kg of lignocaine intravenous (IV) and Group D received 1 mcg/kg of dexmedetomidine as IV infusion. Thiopentone was given until eyelash reflex was lost, and intubation was facilitated with succinylcholine. Anesthesia was maintained with 33:66 oxygen, nitrous oxide, and titrated doses of inhalation agents and vecuronium was given. Hemodynamic parameters were recorded as baseline vitals, at preinduction, after induction, during intubation, 1 min, 3 mins, 5 mins, and 10 mins after intubation. SPSS version 16 was used for analysis. Results: All the demographic variables were well matched between groups. There was a statistically significant difference (p <0.001) between dexmedetomidine and lignocaine in parameters like heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure at all time intervals after tracheal intubation, with dexmedetomidine being the most effective. Sedation scores were more with dexmedetomidine.No adverse effects were noticed in patients of both groups. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine attenuates the hemodynamic stress response to laryngoscopy and intubation more effectively when compared with lignocaine 1.5 mg/kg IV, without any adverse effects.

Perspectives

Objectives: To compare the safety and efficacy of lignocaine versus dexmedetomidine in attenuation of cardiovascular response to laryngoscopy. Study design: Randomized controlled trial. Sixtypatients of ASA I & II category posted for elective surgery under general Anesthesia were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly divided into two Groups: Group L(Lignocaine ) and Group D (Dexmedetomidine) with 30 patients in each group. Materials and Methods: Group L received 1.5 mg/kg of lignocaine intravenous (IV) and Group D received 1 mcg/kg of dexmedetomidine as IV infusion. Thiopentone was given until eyelash reflex was lost, and intubation was facilitated with succinylcholine. Anesthesia was maintained with 33:66 oxygen, nitrous oxide, and titrated doses of inhalation agents and vecuronium was given. Hemodynamic parameters were recorded as baseline vitals, at preinduction, after induction, during intubation, 1 min, 3 mins, 5 mins, and 10 mins after intubation. SPSS version 16 was used for analysis. Results: All the demographic variables were well matched between groups. There was a statistically significant difference (p <0.001) between dexmedetomidine and lignocaine in parameters like heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure at all time intervals after tracheal intubation, with dexmedetomidine being the most effective. Sedation scores were more with dexmedetomidine.No adverse effects were noticed in patients of both groups. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine attenuates the hemodynamic stress response to laryngoscopy and intubation more effectively when compared with lignocaine 1.5 mg/kg IV, without any adverse effects.

Red Flower Publication Publications
Red Flower Publication Pvt Ltd

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Comparison of Intravenous Lignocaine and Dexmedetomidine for Attenuation of Hemodynamic Stress Response to Laryngoscopy and Endotracheal Intubation, Indian Journal of Anaesthesia and Analgesia, July 2020, Red Flower Publication Private, Ltd.,
DOI: 10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.7420.2.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page