SummaryDexmedetomidine, a highly selective and potent a 2 -adrenergic agonist, has a potentially useful role as a sedative agent in patients requiring intensive care. As part of a larger European multicentre trial, a total of 119 postoperative cardiac and general surgical patients requiring ventilation and sedation in an intensive care unit were enrolled in four centres in the United Kingdom. One hundred and five patients were randomly allocated to receive either dexmedetomidine or placebo with rescue sedation and analgesia provided by midazolam and morphine, respectively. Compared with the control group, intubated patients receiving dexmedetomidine required 80% less midazolam [mean 4.9 (5.8) mg.kg
¹1.h ¹1 vs. 23.7 (27.5) mg.kg
¹1.h ¹1 , p < 0.0001], and 50% less morphine [11.2 (13.4) mg.kg. Cardiovascular effects and adverse events could be predicted from the known properties of alpha-2 agonists. In conclusion, dexmedetomidine is a useful agent for the provision of postoperative analgesia and sedation.
The alpha2 agonist dexmedetomidine is a new sedative and analgesic agent which is licensed in the USA for post-operative intensive care sedation. We compared dexmedetomidine with propofol in patients requiring sedation in intensive care. Twenty adult patients expected to require a minimum of 8 h artificial ventilation after surgery were randomized to receive sedation with either dexmedetomidine or propofol infusions. Additional analgesia, if required, was provided by an alfentanil infusion. Depth of sedation was monitored using both the Ramsay sedation score (RSS) and the bispectral index (BIS). Cardiovascular, respiratory, biochemical and haematological data were obtained. Patients' perceptions of their intensive care stay were assessed using the Hewitt questionnaire. Sedation was equivalent in the two groups [median (interquartile range): RSS, propofol group 5 (4-5), dexmedetomidine group 5 (4-6) (P=0.68); BIS, propofol group 53 (41-64), dexmedetomidine group 46 (36-58); P=0.32], but the propofol group received three times more alfentanil compared with patients sedated with dexmedetomidine [2.5 (2.2-2.9) mg h(-1) versus 0.8 (0.65-1.2) mg h(-1) (P=0.004)]. No differences were found in arterial pressures between the groups, but heart rate was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group [mean (SD) 75 (6) vs 90 (4) beats min(-1)]. Extubation times were similar and rapid with the use of both sedative agents [median (range) 28 (20-50) and 29 (15-50) min (P=0.63) respectively for the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups]. No adverse events related to the sedative infusions occurred in either group. Despite ventilation and intubation, patients sedated with dexmedetomidine could be easily roused to cooperate with procedures (e.g. physiotherapy, radiology) without showing irritation. From the clinician's and patient's perspectives, dexmedetomidine is a safe and acceptable sedative agent for those requiring intensive care. The rate pressure product is reduced in patients receiving dexmedetomidine, which may protect against myocardial ischaemia. Dexmedetomidine reduces the requirement for opioid analgesia.
Mean dexmedetomidine pharmacokinetic variables seen in postoperative, intensive care patients were similar to those previously found in volunteers, with the exception of the steady-state volume of distribution. A small loading dose provided effective sedation with no adverse events.
Sedation with dexmedetomidine is efficacious in critically ill medical patients requiring mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit. A reduction in loading infusion is advised, but higher maintenance infusions may be required to that seen previously in the postoperative ICU patient.
We have compared the effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol on endocrine, metabolic, inflammatory and cardiovascular responses in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) after major surgery. Twenty patients who were expected to require 8 h of post-operative sedation and ventilation were allocated randomly to receive either an infusion of dexmedetomidine 0.2-2.5 microg kg(-1) h(-1) or propofol 1-3 mg kg(-1) h(-1). Arterial pressure, heart rate and sequential concentrations of circulating cortisol, adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH), growth hormone, prolactin, insulin, glucose and interleukin 6 were measured. An ACTH stimulation test was performed in all patients who received dexmedetomidine. Heart rate was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine patients. There were no differences in arterial pressure, cortisol, ACTH, prolactin and glucose concentrations between the two groups. A positive response to the ACTH stimulation test varied depending on the diagnostic criteria used. The insulin concentration was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group at 2 h (P=0.021), although this did not affect blood glucose concentrations. Growth hormone concentrations were significantly higher in dexmedetomidine-treated patients overall (P=0.036), but circulating concentrations remained in the physiological range. Interleukin 6 decreased in the dexmedetomidine group. We conclude that dexmedetomidine infusion does not inhibit adrenal steroidogenesis when used for short-term sedation after surgery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.