-
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023The sedative role of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures is unclear. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the...
Efficacy and safety of sedation with dexmedetomidine in adults undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
The sedative role of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures is unclear. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of sedation with DEX during gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures with a view to providing evidence-based references for clinical decision-making. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared DEX with different sedatives comparators (such as propofol, midazolam, and ketamine) for sedation in a variety of adult gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures from inception to 1 July 2022. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) or pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI were used for continuous outcomes or dichotomous outcomes, respectively, and a random-effect model was selected regardless of the significance of the heterogeneity. Forty studies with 2,955 patients were assessed, of which 1,333 patients were in the DEX group and 1,622 patients were in the control (without DEX) group. The results suggested that the primary outcomes of sedation level of DEX are comparable to other sedatives, with similar RSS score and patient satisfaction level, and better in some clinical outcomes, with a reduced risk of body movements or gagging (RR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.97; = 0.04; I = 68%), and a reduced additional requirement for other sedatives, and increased endoscopist satisfaction level (SMD: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.77; = 0.03; I = 86%). In terms of secondary outcomes of adverse events, DEX may benefit patients in some clinical outcomes, with a reduced risk of hypoxia (RR:0.34; 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.55; < 0.0001; I = 52%) and cough (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.54; = 0.0004; I = 0%), no significant difference in the risk of hypotension, while an increased risk of bradycardia (RR: 3.08; 95% CI: 2.12 to 4.48; < 0.00001; I = 6%). This meta-analysis indicates that DEX is a safe and effective sedative agent for gastrointestinal endoscopy because of its benefits for patients in some clinical outcomes. Remarkably, DEX is comparable to midazolam and propofol in terms of sedation level. In conclusion, DEX provides an additional option in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#searchadvanced.
PubMed: 38034988
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1241714 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2024Dexmedetomidine has been used as a perineural local anesthetic (LA) adjuvant to facilitate the potency of erector spinal plane block (ESPB). This quantitative review...
BACKGROUND
Dexmedetomidine has been used as a perineural local anesthetic (LA) adjuvant to facilitate the potency of erector spinal plane block (ESPB). This quantitative review aimed to evaluate whether perineural dexmedetomidine for ESPB can improve the effects of analgesia compared to LA alone.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the addition of dexmedetomidine to LA compared to LA alone in ESPB were included. The pain scores, duration of sensory block, the time to first analgesia requirement, postoperative morphine consumption, rescue analgesia, and dexmedetomidine-related side effects were analyzed and combined using random-effects models.
RESULTS
A total of 823 patients from 13 RCTs were analyzed. Dexmedetomidine was used at the concentration of 0.5 μg/kg in three trials and 1 μg/kg in nine trials, and both in one trial. Both concentrations of dexmedetomidine perineurally administrated significantly reduced the rest VAS scores postoperatively at 12 h (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.86; 95% CI: -1.59 to -0.12; = 0.02; 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.49; 95% CI: -0.83 to -0.16; = 0.004), and 24 h (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.43; 95% CI: -0.74 to -0.13; = 0.005; 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.62; 95% CI: -0.84 to -0.41; < 0.00001). Both concentrations of dexmedetomidine added in LAs improved the dynamic VAS scores postoperatively at 12 h (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.55; 95% CI: -0.95 to -0.15; = 0.007; 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.66; 95% CI: -1.05 to -0.28; = 0.0006) and 24 h (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.52; 95% CI: -0.94 to -0.10; = 0.01; 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.46; 95% CI: -0.75 to -0.16; = 0.002). Furthermore, perineural dexmedetomidine prolonged the duration of the sensory block and the time to first analgesia requirement, reduced postoperative morphine consumption, and lowered the incidence of rescue analgesia and chronic pain.
CONCLUSION
The meta-analysis showed that using perineural dexmedetomidine at either 0.5 μg/kg or 1 μg/kg doses in ESPB can effectively and safely enhance pain relief.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42023424532: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/).
PubMed: 38841587
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1326566 -
BMC Pediatrics May 2024Agitation/delirium is commonly seen in children after anesthesia, and a proper dose of dexmedetomidine can prevent this complication. This study aimed to investigate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Agitation/delirium is commonly seen in children after anesthesia, and a proper dose of dexmedetomidine can prevent this complication. This study aimed to investigate the effects of different doses of Dexmedetomidine (DEX) on agitation/delirium and other complications in anesthetized children, providing clinical evidence for dose recommendations of DEX.
METHODS
This study was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A systematic search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Two independent researchers performed literature screening, data extraction, and assessed the methodological quality. Data analysis was conducted using R and STATA 16.0.
RESULTS
In the final analysis, 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2521 children were included. The results showed that in comparison to normal saline, 1 µg/kg, 1.5 µg/kg, and 2 µg/kg intranasal DEX significantly reduced the incidence of post-anesthetic emergence agitation in children with the most effective dose being 2 µg/kg (SUCRA = 0.91). Compared with normal saline, 1 µg/kg, 1.5 µg/kg, and 2 µg/kg intranasal DEX reduced patient's need for postoperative analgesia, with the most effective dose being 1.5 µg/kg (SUCRA = 0.78). However, 1 µg/kg DEX performed the best in reducing Pediatric Anaesthesia Emergence Delirium (PAED) Scale score (SUCRA = 0.88).
CONCLUSION
Compared with normal saline, intranasal administration of 2 µg/kg DEX and 1.5 µg/kg DEX are the optimal doses to reduce the incidence of agitation and the need for postoperative pain relief in children under general anesthesia. Given effectiveness and safety, intranasal use of 1 µg/kg DEX appears to be the most effective dosage for anesthetized children.
Topics: Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Administration, Intranasal; Child; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Parents; Emergence Delirium; Psychomotor Agitation; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38822315
DOI: 10.1186/s12887-024-04832-w -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Feb 2024: Oral midazolam is the most commonly used sedative premedication agent in pediatric patients. While effective, oral midazolam cannot reduce the incidence of emergence... (Review)
Review
Oral Dexmedetomidine Achieves Superior Effects in Mitigating Emergence Agitation and Demonstrates Comparable Sedative Effects to Oral Midazolam for Pediatric Premedication: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies.
: Oral midazolam is the most commonly used sedative premedication agent in pediatric patients. While effective, oral midazolam cannot reduce the incidence of emergence agitation. Oral dexmedetomidine may be effective in providing satisfactory sedation and reduce the incidence of emergence agitation, although the results of different randomized controlled trials are conflicting. : This study enrolled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining premedication with oral dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam in pediatric patients undergoing general anesthesia. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and the Web of Science database were searched from their inception until June 2023. The outcomes were the incidence of satisfactory preoperative sedation, satisfactory sedation during separation from parents, satisfactory sedation during anesthesia induction using an anesthesia mask, and the incidence of emergence agitation. : A total of 9 RCTs comprising 885 patients were analyzed. Our data revealed comparable effects of dexmedetomidine and midazolam with respect to satisfactory preoperative sedation and a satisfactory incidence of sedation during parental separation and mask acceptance before anesthesia induction. Notably, our data revealed that the rate of emergence agitation was significantly lower in pediatric patients receiving dexmedetomidine ( = 162) than in those receiving midazolam ( = 159) (odds ratio = 0.16; 95% confidence interval: 0.06 to 0.44; < 0.001; = 35%). : Data from this meta-analysis revealed comparable effects for premedication with oral dexmedetomidine or oral midazolam with respect to satisfactory sedation; furthermore, premedication with oral dexmedetomidine more effectively mitigated emergence agitation in pediatric patients receiving general anesthesia compared with oral midazolam.
PubMed: 38398486
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13041174 -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) Dec 2023Effective postoperative pain management is critical for recovery after orthopedic surgery, but often remains inadequate despite multimodal analgesia. This systematic... (Review)
Review
Effective postoperative pain management is critical for recovery after orthopedic surgery, but often remains inadequate despite multimodal analgesia. This systematic review synthesizes evidence on innovative modalities for enhancing pain control following major orthopedic procedures. Fifteen randomized controlled trials and comparative studies evaluating peripheral nerve blocks, local anesthetic infiltration, cryotherapy, transcutaneous electrical stimulation, adjunct medications, and other techniques are included. Thematic analysis reveals that peripheral nerve blocks and local anesthetic infiltration consistently demonstrate reduced pain scores, opioid consumption, and side effects versus conventional analgesia alone. Oral multimodal medications also show promise as part of opioid-sparing regimens. Adjunctive approaches like cryotherapy, music, and dexmedetomidine require further research to optimize protocols. Despite promising innovations, critical knowledge gaps persist regarding comparative effectiveness, optimal interventions and dosing, combination strategies, cost-effectiveness, and implementation. High-quality randomized controlled trials using standardized protocols are essential to guide the translation of enhanced multimodal regimens into clinical practice. This review provides a framework for pursuing research priorities and advancing evidence-based postoperative pain management across orthopedic surgeries.
PubMed: 38137952
DOI: 10.3390/life13122351 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2024Optimizing pain management in spinal surgery is crucial for preventing adverse events due to delayed mobilization. Magnesium sulfate has potential benefits in spinal... (Review)
Review
Optimizing pain management in spinal surgery is crucial for preventing adverse events due to delayed mobilization. Magnesium sulfate has potential benefits in spinal surgery because of its analgesic properties and modulation of neurotransmitters and autonomic nervous system. Existing evidence regarding the use of magnesium sulfate is partial and controversial, necessitating a comprehensive meta-analysis to evaluate its efficacy and safety. The aim of this study was to conduct a comprehensive meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of magnesium sulfate in spinal surgery compared to other available options. This meta-analysis adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. Patients undergoing spinal surgery were included, with the intervention group receiving intravenous magnesium sulfate (MS) at various doses or combinations, whereas the comparison group received other alternatives or a placebo. The efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed. Data were collected from multiple databases and analyzed using Review Manager version 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed and fixed- or random-effects models were applied. The meta-analysis included eight studies ( = 541). Magnesium sulfate demonstrated significant reductions in pain at 24 h (MD -0.20, 95% CI: -0.39 to -0.02) and opioid consumption (SMD -0.66, 95% CI: -0.95 to -0.38) compared to placebo. Additionally, a decrease in the use of muscle relaxants (SMD -0.91, 95% CI: -1.65 to -0.17) and remifentanil (SMD -1.52, 95% CI: -1.98 to -1.05) was observed. In contrast, an increase in extubation time (MD 2.42, 95% CI: 1.14 to 3.71) and verbal response (MD 1.85, 95% CI: 1.13 to 2.58) was observed compared to dexmedetomidine. In conclusion, magnesium sulfate administration in spinal surgery reduced pain and opioid consumption, and prolonged orientation and verbal response. No significant differences in blood pressure or heart rate were observed between the groups.
PubMed: 38892833
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13113122 -
Journal of Pain Research 2024To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ketamine in preventing propofol injection pain (PIP). (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ketamine in preventing propofol injection pain (PIP).
PATIENTS AND METHODS
The electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception until 2 August 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing ketamine with placebo or other interventions to alleviate PIP in adults were included. Fixed-effects or random-effects models were used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on the heterogeneity of the studies included.
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs involving 2105 patients were included. In terms of reducing the incidence of PIP, ketamine is more effective than placebo (RR = 0.43, 95% CI = [0.34, 0.55], < 0.00001), lidocaine (RR = 0.70, 95% CI = [0.55, 0.90], = 0.005), dexmedetomidine (RR = 0.52, 95% CI = [0.40, 0.66], < 0.00001), and thiopental (RR = 0.25, 95% CI = [0.08, 0.83], = 0.02). In reducing the incidence of severe PIP, ketamine is superior to placebo (RR = 0.12, 95% CI = [0.08, 0.19], < 0.00001), and lidocaine (RR = 0.34, 95% CI = [0.21, 0.56], < 0.0001), except dexmedetomidine (RR = 0.20, 95% CI = [0.04, 1.13], = 0.07), and thiopental (RR = 0.33, 95% CI = [0.04, 3.10], = 0.33). Compared with mixed injection, separate injection of ketamine and propofol showed no significant difference in the incidence of PIP (RR = 0.96, 95% CI = [0.31, 3.00], = 0.95) and severe PIP (RR = 1.19, 95% CI = [0.07, 21.29], = 0.90). Based solely on the reports from the studies included, subanesthetic doses of ketamine are generally safe in preventing PIP.
CONCLUSION
A subanesthetic dose of ketamine can effectively and safely reduce the incidence of PIP and severe PIP in adults, and is more effective than lidocaine, dexmedetomidine, and thiopental.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42023455093.
PubMed: 38318331
DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S440250 -
BMC Anesthesiology Nov 2023Emergence agitation (EA) is a prevalent complication in children following general anesthesia. Several studies have assessed the relationship between melatonin or its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Emergence agitation (EA) is a prevalent complication in children following general anesthesia. Several studies have assessed the relationship between melatonin or its analogs and the incidence of pediatric EA, yielding conflicting results. This meta-analysis aims to assess the effects of premedication with melatonin or its analogs on preventing EA in children after general anesthesia.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Data, clinicaltrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched until 25 November 2022. We included randomized controlled trials that assessed EA in patients less than 18 years old who underwent general anesthesia. We excluded studies that did not use a specific evaluation to assess EA.
RESULTS
Nine studies (951 participants) were included in this systematic review. Melatonin significantly reduced the incidence of EA compared with placebos (risk ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.61, P < 0.01) and midazolam (risk ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.73, P < 0.01). Dexmedetomidine remarkably decreased the incidence of EA compared with melatonin (risk ratio 2.04, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.73, P = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS
Melatonin premedication significantly decreases the incidence of EA compared with placebos and midazolam. Dexmedetomidine premedication has a stronger effect than melatonin in preventing EA. Nevertheless, further studies are warranted to reinforce and validate the conclusion on the efficacy of melatonin premedication in mitigating EA in pediatric patients.
Topics: Child; Humans; Adolescent; Midazolam; Dexmedetomidine; Emergence Delirium; Melatonin; Sevoflurane; Methyl Ethers; Premedication
PubMed: 38037000
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02356-x -
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology Dec 2023Mechanical ventilation, particularly one-lung ventilation (OLV), can cause pulmonary dysfunction. This meta-analysis assessed the effects of dexmedetomidine on the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Mechanical ventilation, particularly one-lung ventilation (OLV), can cause pulmonary dysfunction. This meta-analysis assessed the effects of dexmedetomidine on the pulmonary function of patients receiving OLV.
METHODS
The Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry databases were systematically searched. The primary outcome was oxygenation index (OI). Other outcomes including the incidence of postoperative complications were assessed.
RESULTS
Fourteen randomized controlled trials involving 845 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Dexmedetomidine improved the OI at 30 (mean difference [MD]: 40.49, 95% CI [10.21, 70.78]), 60 (MD: 60.86, 95% CI [35.81, 85.92]), and 90 min (MD: 55, 95% CI [34.89, 75.11]) after OLV and after surgery (MD: 28.98, 95% CI [17.94, 40.0]) and improved lung compliance 90 min after OLV (MD: 3.62, 95% CI [1.7, 5.53]). Additionally, dexmedetomidine reduced the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (odds ratio: 0.44, 95% CI [0.24, 0.82]) and length of hospital stay (MD: -0.99, 95% CI [-1.25, -0.73]); decreased tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, and malondialdehyde levels; and increased superoxide dismutase levels. However, only the results for the OI and IL-6 levels were confirmed by the sensitivity and trial sequential analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Dexmedetomidine improves oxygenation in patients receiving OLV and may additionally decrease the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications and shorten the length of hospital stay, which may be related to associated improvements in lung compliance, anti-inflammatory effects, and regulation of oxidative stress reactions. However, robust evidence is required to confirm these conclusions.
Topics: Humans; One-Lung Ventilation; Dexmedetomidine; Lung; Blood Gas Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36924790
DOI: 10.4097/kja.22787 -
PloS One 2024Effective labor pain management is crucial for parturient well-being, as it can improve the delivery experience of pregnant women and reduce anxiety and tension. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Effective labor pain management is crucial for parturient well-being, as it can improve the delivery experience of pregnant women and reduce anxiety and tension. This systematic review and network meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of various analgesics, classified by drug category and individual treatment methods, for labor pain control.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted in Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. All searches commenced from the database's inception to the date of the literature search (May 31, 2023). The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool assessed study bias risk. Network meta-analyses using a random-effects model and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed.
RESULTS
Fifteen randomized controlled trials evaluating analgesic interventions in ASA I or II parturients were included. Combination therapies (OR: 5.81; 95% CI, 3.76-7.84; probability: 60%) and non-opioid analgesics (OR: 5.61; 95% CI, 2.91-8.30; probability: 39.2%) were superior to placebo for labor pain relief. Specifically, dexmedetomidine/ropivacaine/sufentanil (OR: 7.32; 95% CI, 2.73-11.89; probability: 40.6%) and dexmedetomidine/ropivacaine (OR: 6.50; 95% CI, 2.51-10.33; probability: 11.9%) combinations, bupivacaine/fentanyl and ropivacaine/sufentanil combinations, and remifentanil monotherapy showed improved analgesic efficacy versus placebo. Dexmedetomidine/ropivacaine reduced parturient nausea and vomiting versus alternatives.
CONCLUSION
Non-opioids, opioids and combinations thereof effectively relieved labor pain. In addition, dexmedetomidine/ropivacaine combination demonstrated analgesic efficacy and lower nausea and vomiting incidence.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Analgesics, Opioid; Labor Pain; Network Meta-Analysis; Pain Management; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Dexmedetomidine
PubMed: 38889108
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0303174