PurposeDuring emergence from anesthesia for a craniotomy, maintenance of hemodynamic stability and prompt evaluation of neurological status is mandatory. The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil on airway reflex and hemodynamic change in patients undergoing craniotomy.Materials and MethodsSeventy-four patients undergoing clipping of unruptured cerebral aneurysm were recruited. In the dexmedetomidine group, patients were administered dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg) for 5 minutes, while the patients of the remifentanil group were administered remifentanil with an effect site concentration of 1.5 ng/mL until endotracheal extubation. The incidence and severity of cough and hemodynamic variables were measured during the recovery period. Hemodynamic variables, respiration rate, and sedation scale were measured after extubation and in the post-anesthetic care unit (PACU).ResultsThe incidence of grade 2 and 3 cough at the point of extubation was 62.5% in the dexmedetomidine group and 53.1% in the remifentanil group (p=0.39). Mean arterial pressure (p=0.01) at admission to the PACU and heart rate (p=0.04 and 0.01, respectively) at admission and at 10 minutes in the PACU were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group. Respiration rate was significantly lower in the remifentanil group at 2 minutes (p<0.01) and 5 minutes (p<0.01) after extubation.ConclusionWe concluded that a single bolus of dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg) and remifentanil infusion have equal effectiveness in attenuating coughing and hemodynamic changes in patients undergoing cerebral aneurysm clipping; however, dexmedetomidine leads to better preservation of respiration.
BackgroundIn endoscopic sinus surgery, visualization of the surgical field is a major concern, as surgical bleeding is the cause of many complications. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil on the visualization of the surgical field in endoscopic sinus surgery.MethodsForty-three patients were prospectively enrolled and randomly allocated to the dexmedetomidine or remifentanil group and general anesthesia was induced and maintained using a propofol target-controlled infusion. In the dexmedetomidine group, dexmedetomidine was loaded for 5 min and a continuous infusion was administered. In the remifentanil group, a remifentanil target-controlled infusion was used. After completion of the operation, the satisfaction with the visualization of the surgical field was assessed on a numeric rating scale, from 0 (= worst) to 10 (= best). The mean blood pressure, heart rate, recovery profiles, and postoperative pain score were recorded.ResultsSatisfaction score for visualization by numeric rating scale was not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.95). There were no differences in the mean blood pressure and heart rate. The extubation time was significantly shorter in the dexmedetomidine group (8.4 ± 1.8 min) than in the remifentanil group (11.9 ± 5.4 min) (P = 0.04). Except for the extubation time, the recovery profiles of the two groups were comparable.ConclusionsContinuous infusions of dexmedetomidine provide a similar visualization of the surgical field and hemodynamic stability as remifentanil target-controlled infusions in patients undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery.
BackgroundOpioid-based patient controlled analgesia (PCA) provides adequate pain control following spinal surgeries at the expense of increased risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We evaluated the efficacy of dexamethasone added to ramosetron, which is a newly developed five-hydroxytryptamine receptor 3 antagonist with a higher receptor affinity and longer action duration compared to its congeners, on preventing PONV in highly susceptible patients receiving opioid-based IV PCA after spinal surgery.MethodsOne hundred nonsmoking female patients undergoing spinal surgery were randomly allocated to either a ramosetron group (group R) or a ramosetron plus dexamethasone group (group RD)., Normal saline (1 ml) or 5 mg of dexamethasone was injected before anesthetic induction, while at the end of the surgery, ramosetron (0.3 mg) was administered to all patients and fentanyl-based IV PCA was continued for 48 hrs. The incidence and severity of PONV, pain score and the amount of rescue antiemetics were assessed for 48 hours after surgery.ResultsThe number of patients with moderate to severe nausea (20 vs. 10, P = 0.029), and overall incidence of vomiting (13 vs. 5, P = 0.037) were significantly lower in the group RD than in the group R, respectively. Rescue antiemetic was used less in the RD group without significance.ConclusionsCombination of ramosetron and dexamethasone significantly reduced the incidence of moderate to severe nausea and vomiting compared to ramosetron alone in highly susceptible patients receiving opioid-based IV PCA after surgery.
Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) is an unfamiliar term to anesthesiologists, and this is characterized by neurologic symptoms that include mental change, headache, seizure and visual disturbance and also abnormal neuroimaging finding. A 71-year-old female patient was operated on for posterior decompression and total laminectomy under general anesthesia for the spinal stenosis. After the operation, she developed generalized tonic-clonic seizure and a stuporous mentality in the recovery room. The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed swelling and increased signal intensity at the deep gray nuclei, cerebral cortex and cerebellum. After one week, she returned to an alert mentality and then she was diagnosed with PRES. She was discharged without any neurologic deficit on postoperative day 20. This report describes our experience with PRES after spinal surgery was performed under general anesthesia on a suspected untreated hypertensive patient.
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.