Monitored Anesthesia Care with Dexmedetomidine: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Trial

被引:167
|
作者
Candiotti, Keith A. [1 ]
Bergese, Sergio D. [2 ,3 ]
Bokesch, Paula M. [4 ]
Feldman, Marc A. [5 ]
Wisemandle, Wayne [4 ]
Bekker, Alex Y. [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Miami, Dept Anesthesiol Perioperat Med & Pain Management, Div Perioperat Med, Miami, FL 33101 USA
[2] Ohio State Univ, Dept Anesthesiol, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[3] Ohio State Univ, Dept Neurol Surg, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[4] Hospira Inc, Lake Forest, IL USA
[5] Cleveland Clin, Sect Anesthesia, Cole Eye Inst, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[6] NYU, Dept Anesthesiol, Med Ctr, New York, NY 10016 USA
来源
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA | 2010年 / 110卷 / 01期
关键词
CATARACT-SURGERY; INTENSIVE-CARE; SEDATION; MIDAZOLAM; RECOVERY; PROPOFOL; PATIENT; EFFICACY; SCALE;
D O I
10.1213/ane.0b013e3181ae0856
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is increasingly being used as a sedative for monitored anesthesia care (MAC) because of its analgesic properties, "cooperative sedation," and lack of respiratory depression. In this randomized, multicenter, double-blind, Phase III Food and Drug Administration Study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of two doses of DEX for sedation of patients undergoing a broad range Of Surgical or diagnostic procedures requiring MAC. METHODS: Three hundred twenty-six patients were randomized 2:2:1 to DEX 0.5 mu g/kg, DEX 1 mu g/kg, or saline placebo initial loading dose, followed by a maintenance infusion of 0.2-1.0 mu g . kg(-1) . h(-1) of DEX (or equivalent volume of saline) titrated to a targeted level of sedation (:54 on the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale [OAA/S]). Study drug was started at least 15 min before placement of regional or local anesthetic block. Midazolam was given for OAA/S >4 and fentanyl for pain. The primary end-point was the percentage of patients not requiring rescue midazolam. RESULTS: Significantly fewer patients in the 0.5- and 1-mu g/kg DEX groups required supplemental midazolam compared with placebo (59.7% [80/134], 45.7% [59/129] vs 96.8% [61/63], respectively; P < 0.001) and at lower doses to achieve an OAA/S <= 4 before and during surgery compared with the saline group (1.4 and 0.9 mg vs; 4.1 mg, respectively; P < 0.001, each group compared with placebo). Both DEX groups required significantly less fentanyl (84.8 and 83.6 mu g vs 1.44.4 mu g, respectively; P < 0.001, for both DEX groups versus placebo) for all surgical subtypes. Anesthesiologists indicated significantly increased ease of achieving and maintaining targeted sedation in both DEX groups compared with placebo with midazolam (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was significantly higher with DEX (P <= 0.009, both groups versus placebo). Common adverse events with DEX were protocol-defined bradycardia and hypotension that were predominately mild to moderate in severity. The incidence of clinically significant respiratory depression (defined as a respiratory rate of <8 or M oxygen saturation of <90%) was lower in DEX-treated patients (P = 0.018, for both groups versus placebo). CONCLUSIONS: DEX is an effective baseline sedative for patients undergoing MAC for a broad range of surgical procedures providing better patient satisfaction, less opioid requirements, and less respiratory depression than placebo rescued with midazolam and fentanyl. (Anesth Analg 2010;110:47-56)
引用
收藏
页码:47 / 56
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Effects of ketamine, granisetron and dexmedetomidine on postoperative shivering and hemodynamic changes after general anesthesia: a double-blind randomized clinical trial
    Shabani, Yazdan
    Moshiri, Esmail
    Modir, Hesameddin
    Kamali, Alireza
    Almasi-Hashiani, Amir
    MEDICAL GAS RESEARCH, 2024, 14 (01): : 19 - 25
  • [32] Efficacy of lidocaine spray as topical anesthesia for outpatient rigid cystoscopy in women: A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial
    Choe, Jin Ho
    Kwak, Kyung Won
    Hong, Jeong Hee
    Lee, Hyun Moo
    UROLOGY, 2008, 71 (04) : 561 - 566
  • [33] Protocol: dexmedetomidine on myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery—a multicenter, double-blind, controlled trial
    Huayue Liu
    Juan Zhang
    Ke Peng
    Xiaowen Meng
    Xisheng Shan
    Wenwen Huo
    Hong Liu
    Yishan Lei
    Fuhai Ji
    Perioperative Medicine, 12
  • [34] 0.5% versus 1.0% 2-chloroprocaine for intravenous regional anesthesia: A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial
    Marsch, SC
    Sluga, M
    Studer, W
    Barandun, J
    Scharplatz, D
    Ummenhofer, W
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2004, 98 (06): : 1789 - 1793
  • [35] RESULTS OF A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED DOUBLE-BLIND TRIAL OF APROTININ IN COLONIC SURGERY
    YOUNG, HL
    WHEELER, MH
    CLARK, CG
    HAMPSON, LG
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1984, 8 (03) : 367 - 373
  • [36] SURGERY FOR CURLY TOE DEFORMITY - A DOUBLE-BLIND, RANDOMIZED, PROSPECTIVE TRIAL
    HAMER, AJ
    STANLEY, D
    SMITH, TWD
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 1993, 75 (04): : 662 - 663
  • [37] THROMBOCYTOPENIA IN A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND TRIAL OF BOVINE AND PORCINE HEPARIN
    GREEN, D
    MARTIN, GJ
    SHOICHET, SH
    DEBACKER, N
    BOMALASKI, JS
    LIND, RN
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THE MEDICAL SCIENCES, 1984, 288 (02): : 60 - 64
  • [38] Evaluation of pharyngeal lidocaine anesthesia for esophagogastroduodenoscopy: Double-blind randomized control trial
    Martin-Marcos, Irene
    Fernandez-Morte, Nuria
    Balsategui-Martin, Maria
    Ortiz-Cantero, Alexandra
    Bermudez-Ampudia, Cristina
    Lopez-Picado, Amanda
    Perez-Vaquero, Pilar
    Salvador-Perez, Marta
    Cristobal-Dominguez, Estibaliz
    DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY, 2022, 34 (04) : 808 - 815
  • [39] Dexmedetomidine-remifentanil vs propofol-remifentanil for monitored anesthesia care during hysteroscopy Randomized, single-blind, controlled trial
    Park, Seongjoo
    Choi, Soo-Lyoen
    Nahm, Francis Sahngun
    Ryu, Jung-Hee
    Do, Sang-Hwan
    MEDICINE, 2020, 99 (43) : E22712
  • [40] Radiotherapy for Ledderhose Disease: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial (NCT03507010)
    de Haan, A.
    van Nes, J. G. H.
    van der Toorn, P. P.
    Westenberg, H.
    Kolff, W. W.
    van der Laan, H. P.
    Werker, P. M. N.
    Langendijk, J. A.
    Steenbakkers, R. J. H. M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2022, 114 (03): : E422 - E422