Efficacy of Magnesium Sulfate and Dexmedetomidine as Adjuvants to Ropivacaine in Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Randomised Clinical Study

被引:0
|
作者
Singh, Poonam [1 ]
Gupta, Nidhi [2 ]
Kumar, Rajesh [3 ,5 ]
Jaiswal, Apoorva [4 ]
Jaggi, Sahil [3 ]
Sharma, Raydhi [3 ]
机构
[1] Sharda Univ, Sch Med Sci & Res, Dept Anaesthesiol, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India
[2] Govt Doon Med Coll, Dept Anaesthesiol, Dehra Dun, Uttaranchal, India
[3] Era Med Coll, Dept Anaesthesiol, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
[4] King Georges Med Univ, Dept Anaesthesiol, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
[5] Era Med Coll, Dept Anaesthesiol, Lucknow 226003, Uttar Pradesh, India
关键词
Haemodynamic stability; Limb surgeries; Local anaesthesia; Postoperative analgesia; LOCAL-ANESTHETICS; PERIPHERAL-NERVE;
D O I
10.7860/JCDR/2024/69087.19112
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: Peripheral nerve blocks have recently proven to be extremely promising in terms of patient satisfaction. In upper limb procedures, rapid and deep anaesthesia can be achieved with supraclavicular ultrasound-guided access to the brachial plexus. To improve the quality of local anaesthesia, adjuvants such as magnesium sulfate and dexmedetomidine have been added to the local anaesthetic. Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of magnesium sulfate and dexmedetomidine as adjuvants to ropivacaine in supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Blockade (BPB). Materials and Methods: A prospective randomised double-blind study was conducted in the Department of Anaesthesiology from June 2016 to November 2017 ( 1 year and 6 months) at King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. A total of 60 patients were divided into two groups using a computer -generated random number for upper limb surgeries (below the mid-humerus) under supraclavicular brachial plexus block. Group A (n=30) received ropivacaine 0.5% (30 mL) plus dexmedetomidine 50 pg for the supraclavicular block, and Group B received ropivacaine 0.5% (30 mL) plus magnesium sulfate 150 mg in 1 mL Normal Saline (NS) 0.9% for the same block. A comparison of these two groups was conducted for the time of onset, duration of sensory and motor block, haemodynamic stability, postoperative analgesia, and complications. Statistical analyses such as Student's t -test, Chi-square test, and Mann-Whitney U-test were used. Results: The mean age of Group A was 28.03 +/- 5.86 years and Group B was 31.07 +/- 7.06 years. The sensory block and motor block onset were significantly faster among patients of Group A (6.47 +/- 1.43 min and 8.50 +/- 1.46 min) compared to Group B (9.57 +/- 1.22 min and 11.77 +/- 1.19 min). The mean duration of analgesia was significantly longer (p<0.001) in Group A (1034.10 +/- 61.07 min) compared to Group B (460.00 +/- 35.82 min). The duration of sensory block and motor block was also significantly higher (p<0.001) in Group A compared to Group B. Both groups were haemodynamically stable, but sedation was significantly higher in Group A. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine 50 pg is a superior adjuvant compared to magnesium sulfate 150 mg with ropivacaine 0.5% in supraclavicular brachial plexus block as it significantly hastens onset time and prolongs the duration of sensory and motor blocks and the duration of analgesia.
引用
收藏
页码:UC1 / UC5
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Analgesic effect of Ropivacaine combined with Dexmedetomidine on brachial plexus block
    Zhenqing Liu
    Menglu Jiang
    Tongsheng Xu
    Hao Hua
    BMC Anesthesiology, 18
  • [32] Analgesic effect of Ropivacaine combined with Dexmedetomidine on brachial plexus block
    Liu, Zhenqing
    Jiang, Menglu
    Xu, Tongsheng
    Hua, Hao
    BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2018, 18
  • [33] A Randomized Controlled Study of 0.5% Bupivacaine, 0.5% Ropivacaine and 0.75% Ropivacaine for Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block
    Venkatesh, Ranjan R.
    Kumar, Prabhat
    Trissur, Ramachandran R.
    George, Sagiev Koshy
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2016, 10 (12) : UC9 - UC12
  • [34] Ultrasound guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block using plain ropivacaine and ropivacaine with additives
    Mathew, S.
    Prasad, S.
    Krishna, R.
    Kumar, A.
    Shiyad, M.
    SRI LANKAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2018, 26 (01): : 15 - 21
  • [35] Effect of perineural dexmedetomidine on the quality of supraclavicular brachial plexus block with 0.5% ropivacaine and its interaction with general anaesthesia
    Gurajala, Indira
    Thipparampall, Anil Kumar
    Durga, Padmaja
    Gopinath, R.
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2015, 59 (02) : 89 - 95
  • [36] PERINEURAXIAL DEXMEDETOMIDINE DECREASES THE MINIMUM EFFECTIVE VOLUME OF ROPIVACAINE FOR ULTRASOUND-GUIDED SUPRACLAVICULAR BRACHIAL PLEXUS BLOCK
    Qian, X.
    Zhao, H.
    Rao, Y.
    Nan, Y.
    Wang, Z.
    Wang, X.
    Lian, Q.
    Li, J.
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2016, 123 : 646 - 646
  • [37] Perineuraxial dexmedetomidine decreases the minimum effective volume of ropivacaine for ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block
    Qian, Xiaowei
    Zhao, Hang
    Rao, Yuquan
    Nan, Yang
    Wang, Zhongsu
    Wang, Xiaoqing
    Lian, Qingquan
    Li, Jun
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, 2016, 9 (10): : 19461 - 19467
  • [38] Low Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block with Dexmedetomidine and Clonidine as Adjuvants to Local Anaesthetic Mixture: A Double-blind Randomised Clinical Study
    Rekhi, Balwinder Kaur
    Bindra, Tripat Kaur
    Kaur, Lovepreet
    Mehta, Priyanka
    Kaur, Simrit
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2022, 16 (12) : UC10 - UC14
  • [39] COMPARISON OF DEXMEDETOMIDINE AND CLONIDINE AS AN ADJUVANT TO BUPIVACAINE IN SUPRACLAVICULAR BRACHIAL PLEXUS BLOCK: A RANDOMISED DOUBLE-BLIND PROSPECTIVE STUDY
    Munshi, Fayaz Ahmad
    Bano, Fahmeeda
    Khan, Aftab Ahmad
    Saleem, Basharat
    Rather, Mushtaq Ahmad
    JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION OF MEDICAL AND DENTAL SCIENCES-JEMDS, 2015, 4 (42): : 7263 - 7268
  • [40] Efficacy of ropivacaine in continuous axillary brachial plexus block
    Ekatodramis, G
    Hutter, B
    Borgeat, A
    REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2000, 25 (06) : 664 - 664