Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to local wound infiltration anaesthesia: A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of 23 randomised controlled trials.

ABSTRACT: To further identify the real efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to local wound infiltration anaesthesia, we conducted this meta-analysis. The systematic search strategy was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases. As a result, a total of 23 RCTs (1445 patients) were included. Patients receiving dexmedetomidine combined with local anaesthetics had a lower rescue analgesia rate [risk ratio (RR): 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.65] and lower rescue analgesic consumption [weighted mean difference (WMD): -10.80 mg; 95%CI: -13.28 to -8.31 mg] than patients receiving local anaesthetics alone. The dexmedetomidine-related adverse reactions included bradycardia (RR: 1.33; 95%CI: 0.32-5.56) and hypotension (RR: 3.00; 95%CI: 0.49-18.42). In addition, the time to first analgesic request (WMD: 296.16 minutes; 95%CI: 165.69 minutes ~ 426.63 minutes), incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and pain scores at 4 hours postoperatively were also significantly lower in patients receiving dexmedetomidine combined with local anaesthetics. This meta-analysis demonstrated that the use of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to wound infiltration is effective for reducing the rescue analgesia rate, rescue analgesic consumption and PONV. In addition, limited evidence shows that dexmedetomidine can prolong postoperative analgesia for approximately 5 hours. Further investigations on dexmedetomidine-related adverse reactions and the dose-response effect of dexmedetomidine in wound infiltration are warranted.

SUBMITTER: Ren Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7949019 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to local wound infiltration anaesthesia: A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of 23 randomised controlled trials.

Ren Yifeng Y Wei Mengling M Liu Hong H Wang Yao Y Chen Hairuo H Li Zhuohong Z Shi Wei W You Fengming F

International wound journal 20201109 1

To further identify the real efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to local wound infiltration anaesthesia, we conducted this meta-analysis. The systematic search strategy was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases. As a result, a total of 23 RCTs (1445 patients) were included. Patients receiving dexmedetomidine combined with local anaesthetics had a lower rescue analgesia rate [risk ratio (RR): 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.65] and l ...[more]

PMID: 33169515

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundConflicting evidence exists regarding the optimal waiting time for stable analgesic and vasoconstrictive effects after local infiltration of lidocaine with epinephrine. An objective review is needed to dispel surgical dogma.MethodsThis systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022362414) included RCTs and prospective cohort studies. Primary outcomes were (1) onset of analgesia and (2) onset of stable hypoperfusion, assessed directly, or measured indirectly using perfusion imaging. Other data extracted include waiting strategies, means of outcome assessment, anaesthetic concentrations, volume/endpoint of infiltration, and injection sites. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Articles describing waiting strategies were critically appraised by the Joanna Briggs Institute tools.ResultsTwenty-four articles were analysed, comprising 1013 participants. Ten investigated analgesia onset. Their pooled mean was 2.1 min (range 0.4-9.0 min). This varied with anatomic site and targeted nerve diameter. Fourteen articles investigated onset of stable hypoperfusion. Four observed bleeding intraoperatively, finding the minimum time to hypoperfusion at 7.0 min in the eyelid skin and 25.0 min in the upper limb. The ten remaining studies used perfusion imaging, reporting a wide range of results (0.0-30.0 min) due to differences in anatomic sites and depth, resolution and artefacts. Studies using near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy and hyperspectral imaging correlated with clinical observations. Thirteen articles discussed waiting strategies, seven relating to large-volume tumescent local infiltration anaesthesia. Different waiting strategies exist for emergency, arthroscopic and cosmetic surgeries, according to the degree of hypoperfusion required. In tumescent liposuction, waiting 10.0-60.0 min is the norm.ConclusionCurrent literature suggests that around 2 min are required for most patients to achieve complete analgesia in all sites and with all anaesthesia concentrations. Waiting around 7 min in eyelids and at least 25 min in other regions results in optimal hypoperfusion. The strategies discussed inform decisions of when and how long to wait.

Project description:IntroductionAdding adjuvants to local wound infiltration (LWI) provides long analgesic duration with fewer adverse effects. We aimed to compare the clinical effects of nalbuphine and ketorolac as an adjuvant to LWI in patients undergoing open colorectal cancer surgery.MethodA total of 126 ASA I-III patients aged ≥ 18 years who were scheduled for open colorectal cancer surgery were included. Patients were randomly assigned to receive LWI using 10 mL 0.75% ropivacaine, with 20 mL normal saline (group R), 10 mg nalbuphine in 1 mL (group RN), or 25 mg ketorolac in 0.8 mL (group RK). Analgesia duration was the primary outcome. The total 48-h postoperative morphine-equivalent consumption and additional rescue analgesia rates were recorded as key secondary outcomes.ResultsAmong 126 patients randomized, 124 completed the trial. The duration until the first press of the analgesia pump was significantly shorter in group R (median: 320.0 min) compared with group RN (median: 829.5 min) and group RK (median: 820.0 min) (P < 0.001). The median difference in morphine consumption was 113.0 mg for group R vs. group RN (P < 0.001), and 115.5 mg for group R vs. group RK (P < 0.001). The proportion of patients using additional morphine within the first day after surgery in group R showed a higher relative risk (RR) compared with group RN (RR, 3.89; P = 0.001) and group RK (RR, 3.17; P = 0.001). There were no apparent differences between the RN and RK groups in any outcomes, whether in adjusted or unadjusted analysis.ConclusionsAmong patients undergoing open colorectal cancer surgery, both nalbuphine and ketorolac infiltration achieved equally prolonged duration of analgesia and reduced morphine consumption compared with ropivacaine alone after surgery, suggesting that the equivalent analgesic dose of nalbuphine and ketorolac as local anesthetic adjuvants in LWI could have a similar analgesic effect.Trial registrationChiCTR1800019209.

Project description:BackgroundDexmedetomidine, a highly selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist, has been investigated for anti-shivering effects in some trials. This current meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine as a neuraxial adjuvant in preventing perioperative shivering.MethodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO [www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO] with the unique identification number CRD42017055991. The electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched to select high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the anti-shivering efficacy for neuraxial application dexmedetomidine as local anesthetic adjuvant. Effects were summarized using pooled risk ratios (RRs), weighed mean differences (MDs), or standardized mean differences (SMDs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (Cls) with random effect model. Heterogeneity assessment, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were performed. The primary outcome was perioperative shivering.ResultsA total of 1760 patients from 24 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the placebo, dexmedetomidine reduced the incidence of perioperative shivering (RR: 0.34; 95% Cl: 0.21 to 0.55; P < 0.00001), with a maximum effective dose of 5μg via subarachnoid space injection (RR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.92; P = 0.02), especially in cesarean section (RR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.45; P = 0.0001). Dexmedetomidine also could improve the characteristics of the block, with an increase only in the incidence of bradycardia (RR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.23 to 3.60; P = 0.006). No significant difference could be found compared dexmedetomidine with other adjuvants, except morphine.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis shows that dexmedetomidine as a neuraxial adjuvant had statistically significant efficacy on prevention of perioperative shivering. Moreover, dexmedetomidine could improve the characteristics of the block. However, the potential induction of bradycardia should be taken seriously.

Project description:Background Dexmedetomidine (DEX) has been thought to be an effective adjuvant to local anesthetics (LAs) in erector spinae plane block (ESPB), however, this method of use is not recorded in the drug instructions. Hence, our meta-analysis will evaluate its efficacy and safety for the first time. Methods A systematic search of published articles was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane Library databases up to July 17, 2022, using specific keywords related to our aims. The time first to request rescue analgesia, number of patient controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) presses, rate of rescue analgesia use, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), arrhythmia, and hypotension were calculated by using random-effect models. This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022345488). Results Numerous electronic databases were searched and finally 8 studies with a total of 570 patients, 303 in the DEX arm, 267 in the control arm were included. As an adjuvant to LAs, DEX significantly increased the time to first request of rescue analgesia (mean difference [MD] = 8.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.70–12.10, P < 0.00001), reduced the number of PCIA presses (MD = -4.12, 95% CI = -7.79 to -0.45, P = 0.03) and the rate of rescue analgesia (odds ratio [OR] = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.17–0.65, P = 0.002). Moreover, the combination reduced the risk of PONV (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.36–0.91, P = 0.02). In addition, there was no difference in the incidence of hypotension (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.37–2.74, P = 0.99) and arrhythmia (OR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.19–3.07, P = 0.70). Conclusion DEX can reduce analgesic requirements after various surgical procedures when used as an adjuvant to LAs for ESPB. Moreover, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of safety indicators (arrhythmia, hypotension). Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-023-02019-x.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to local wound infiltration anaesthesia: A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of 23 randomised controlled trials.

Publications

Efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to local wound infiltration anaesthesia: A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of 23 randomised controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets