Effects of different dexmedetomidine doses on haemodynamic variability during laryngoscopy and intubation: A randomized double-blind study

Kalyani; Savita  Meena; Siddharth  Sharma

doi:10.18231/j.joapr.2023.11.2.20.26

Authors

Kalyani Department of Anaesthesia, Jhalawar Medical College, Jhalawa
Savita Meena Department of Anaesthesia, SMS Medical College, Jaipur https://orcid.org/0009-0003-7046-6412
Siddharth Sharma Department of Anaesthesia, SMS Medical College, Jaipur

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18231/j.joapr.2023.11.2.20.26

Keywords:

Intubation, Hemodynamic variables, laryngoscopy, Dexmedetomidine

Abstract

Background: Effective airway management is vital in anesthesiology for preserving patient lives. Laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation, commonly used procedures, can lead to undesirable outcomes due to vagal activation and sympathoadrenal reaction. This double-blind, randomized interventional study aimed to assess the impact of two different doses of dexmedetomidine on heart rate and blood pressure during laryngoscopy and intubation, which often induce tachycardia and hypertension, particularly risky for patients with hypertension, myocardial insufficiency, and cerebrovascular disease.

Methods: Seventy-six participants, aged 20-60 years and classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Grade I & II, were enrolled after Institutional Ethics Committee approval. Random allocation assigned them to two groups: Group A (0.5 µg/kg dexmedetomidine) and Group B (1.0 µg/kg dexmedetomidine) before anesthesia induction. Hemodynamic measurements were recorded at various time points: pre- and post-drug administration, before intubation, and at intervals thereafter.

Results: Both groups exhibited similar age, weight, and gender distribution. Group B consistently demonstrated lower hemodynamic variables compared to Group A after laryngoscopy and intubation. Additionally, Group B required a smaller induction dose of propofol than Group A. No significant adverse effects were reported in either group during the study.

Conclusion: The study suggests that intravenous administration of dexmedetomidine at a rate of 1 µg/kg is more effective than 0.5 µg/kg in attenuating the physiological response to laryngoscopy and intubation. Moreover, it reduces the required propofol dose for anesthesia induction. These findings highlight the potential benefits of higher dexmedetomidine doses in mitigating adverse physiological effects during airway management procedures

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Komasawa N, Berg BW. Simulation-based Airway Management Training for Anesthesiologists - A Brief Review of its Essential Role in Skills Training for Clinical Competency. J Educ Perioper Med 19, E612. (2017)

Sarkar A, Tripathi RK, Choubey S, Singh RB, Awasthi S. Comparison of effects of intravenous clonidine and dexmedetomidine for blunting pressor response during laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation: A randomized control study. Anesth Essays Res 8, 361-6. (2014)

Shribman AJ, Smith G, Achola KJ. Cardiovascular and catecholamine responses to laryngoscopy with and without tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth 59, 295-9. (1987)

Singhal S, Neha. Haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation: comparison of McCoy and macintosh laryngoscope. The Internet Journal of Anesthesiology 17(1), 1 – 5 (2017)

Joffe AM & Deem SA. “Physiologic and pathophysiologic responses to intubation.” In Textbook-Bneumof and Hagberg’s Airway Management. Philadelphia: Elesvier. Saunders, 3, 184-195 (2012).

Prys-Roberts C, Greene LT, Meloche R, Foëx P. Studies of anaesthesia in relation to hypertension. II. Haemodynamic consequences of induction and endotracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth 43, 531-47. (1971).

Dalton B, Guiney T. Myocardial ischemia from tachycardia and hypertension in coronary heart disease – Patients undergoing anaesthesia. Boston: Ann Mtg American Society of Anaesthesiologists 201–2 (1972)

Kamibayashi T, Maze M. Clinical uses of alpha2 -adrenergic agonists. Anesthesiology 93, 1345-9. (2000).

Stoelting RK, Hiller SC. Textbook of pharmacology and physiology in anesthetic practice. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 4, 340-45 (2006).

Gertler R, Brown HC, Mitchell DH, Silvius EN. Dexmedetomidine: a novel sedative-analgesic agent. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 14, 13-21. (2001).

Smitha KS, Shukla D, Sathesha M, Rao R, Nethra SS, Sudheesh K. Comparison of two different doses of dexmedetomidine in attenuating hemodynamic changes during laryngoscopy. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences 3(61), 1350 (2014).

Silpa AR, Koshy KA, Subramanian A, Pradeep KK. Comparison of the efficacy of two doses of dexmedetomidine in attenuating the hemodynamic response to intubation in patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery: A randomized double-blinded study. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 36, 83-7 (2020)

Patel JB, Agrawal R, Mehta M. An observational study to compare the effect of two different doses of dexmedetomidine on hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. Medico-legal Update 21(1), 381-8 (2021).

Sebastian B, Talikoti AT, Krishnamurthy D. Attenuation of haemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation with intravenous dexmedetomidine: A comparison between two doses. Indian J Anaesth 61, 48-54 (2017).

Dhanachandra L, Singh LK. Haemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation after intravenous dexmedetomidine: a comparison between two doses. J. Evid. Based Med. Healthc 6, 520-6 (2019).

Sharma N, Mehta N. Therapeutic efficacy of two different doses of dexmedetomidine on the hemodynamic response to intubation, the intubating conditions, and the effect on the induction dose of propofol: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Anesth Essays Res 12, 566-71 (2018).