A Comparative Study on Sedation Efficacy Between General and Regional Anesthesia with Dexmedetomidine in Patients Under Maxillofacial Surgery.

Autor:	Yanan J; Department of Anesthesiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an 710068, China., Hui D; Department of Anesthesiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an 710068, China., Jianwei G; Department of Anesthesiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an 710068, China., Ronglin L; Department of Anesthesiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an 710068, China., Lijuan Z; Department of Anesthesiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an 710068, China., Jing Z; Department of Anesthesiology, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Xi'an 710068, China.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Current drug metabolism [Curr Drug Metab] 2022; Vol. 23 (11), pp. 920-927.
DOI:	10.2174/1389200223666220413113412
Abstrakt:	Background and Objective: Securing the airway in the surgery of maxillofacial disorders and traumas is fundamental during the operation. The present study aims to investigate the beneficial sedative effects of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in patients who underwent maxillofacial surgery with regional anesthesia compared to general anesthesia. Methods: Fifty patients, aged 20-45 years old were randomly divided into two groups of regional anesthesia (RA) and general anesthesia (GA) (each n=25). The group RA received regional block with sedation (DEX: 1 μg/kg infused over 10 min followed by the maintenance dose of 0.5 μg/kg/h) and the group GA underwent general anesthesia (DEX: 0.1 μg/kg/min over 10 min followed by 0.4-0.7 μg/kg/h). Postoperative pain scores, anesthesia outcomes, hemodynamic parameters, the time of the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge and intra and postoperative complications were comparatively assessed in both groups. Results: The baseline characteristics of the patients (age, gender, BMI, and ASA physical status) showed no differences between the two groups (P>0.05). Although the duration of surgery and recovery time showed no differences between the groups, the duration of anesthesia and extubation time was remarkably lower in the RA group than in the GA group (P<0.01). Administration of nerve blocks demonstrated less pain and longer sleep time in the postoperative phase as compared to the GA group. Heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure were significantly less in the RA group at the end of the loading dose of DEX and incision time (P<0.05). SpO2, respiration rate and Ramsay sedation scale did not exhibit any significant differences between the two groups at all-time points (P>0.05). No significant differences were observed with regard to the adverse events between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions: Although our findings revealed that both methods are suitable and safe methods for maxillofacial surgery, the outcomes of anesthesia with regional block and sedation include less pain in the postoperative phase, shorter extubation time and earlier discharge from the PACU demonstrated that this method is more reliable for maxillofacial surgery. Further controlled studies are needed to compare the effectiveness and safety profiles of two RA and GA techniques and also to compare DEX with other anesthetic agents to achieve optimum outcomes in maxillofacial surgeries. (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu