A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED CONTROL STUDY COMPARING POST-OPERATIVE ANALGESIA AFTER WOUND INFILTRATION WITH ROPIVACAINE ALONE AND ROPIVACAINE WITH DEXMEDETOMIDINE IN SPINE FIXATION SURGERIES WITH PROSTHESIS

Authors

  • SHASHI RAVI KONNUR Department of Anaesthesia, SMS Medical College and Hospital, Jaipur, India
  • P. S. LAMBA Department of Anaesthesia, SMS Medical College and Hospital, Jaipur, India
  • SHIVI Department of Anaesthesia, SMS Medical College and Hospital, Jaipur, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ijcpr.2023v15i4.3018

Keywords:

Wound infiltration, Ropivacaine, Dexmedetomidine

Abstract

Objective: To compare postoperative analgesia after wound infiltration with ropivacaine alone and ropivacaine with dexmedetomidine in spine fixation surgeries with prosthesis. This is aprospective randomized double-blind clinical trial.

Methods: A total of 60 patients were recruited in this study based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Written informed consent was obtained from every patient. Patients were randomized by computer-generated randomization into two groups. Group R received an injection ropivacaine 0.5% in a dose of 2 mg/kg for wound infiltration, while those in group RD received an injection dexmedetomidine 0.5mcg/Kg along with ropivacaine 0.5% 2 mg/kg for wound infiltration at the end of surgery. Patients were observed till 24 h postoperatively. VAS score, duration of analgesia, total rescue analgesic consumption, any side effects were observed and noted at specified time intervals.

Results: VAS score was found to be lower in group RD at any time interval till 24 h postoperatively, with a p value = 0.004. Time to first rescue analgesic demand was 281.43±11.1 min in group R while it was 912.57±52.61 min in group RD. This difference was found to be statistically significant (p value = 0.01). In group R, 200±39.39 mg of tramadol was consumed as rescue analgesic, while in group RD 136.67±28.42 mg of tramadol was consumed till 24 h post-operatively. Tramadol consumption was found to be significantly low in group RD (p =0.007). No significant side effect was observed in either of the groups.

Conclusion: Based on our study, we conclude that dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to ropivacaine for local wound infiltration improves analgesic profile, increase analgesia duration and reduces opioid requirement in patients undergoing spine surgeries with prosthesis.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Zhang Y, Wang CS, Shi JH, Sun B, liu SJ, Li P. Perineural administration of dexmedetomidine in combination with ropivacaine prolongs axillary brachial plexus block. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2014;7(3):680-5. PMID 24753763.

Mitra S, Purohit S, Sharma M. Postoperative analgesia after wound infiltration with tramadol and dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to ropivacaine for lumbar discectomies: a randomized-controlled clinical trial. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 2017;29(4):433-8. doi: 10.1097/ANA.0000000000000422, PMID 28266950.

Daiki M, Najar M, Chkili R, Rafrafi A, Ben Gabsia A, Labbene I. Postoperative analgesia after wound infiltration with dexmedetomidine and ropivacaine versus ropivacaine alone for lumbar discectomies: a randomized controlled trial. Tunis Med. 2019;97(12):1375-82. PMID 32173808.

Kang H. The effect of dexmedetomidine added to preemptive ropivacaine infiltration on postoperative pain after inguinal herniorrhaphy: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Eur Surg. 2012;44(4):274-80. doi: 10.1007/s10353-012-0085-8.

Bhardwaj S, Devgan S, Sood D, Katyal S. Comparison of local wound infiltration with ropivacaine alone or ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine for postoperative pain relief after lower segment cesarean section. Anesth Essays Res. 2017;11(4):940-5. doi: 10.4103/aer.AER_14_17, PMID 29284853.

Published

15-07-2023

How to Cite

KONNUR, S. R., P. S. LAMBA, and SHIVI. “A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED CONTROL STUDY COMPARING POST-OPERATIVE ANALGESIA AFTER WOUND INFILTRATION WITH ROPIVACAINE ALONE AND ROPIVACAINE WITH DEXMEDETOMIDINE IN SPINE FIXATION SURGERIES WITH PROSTHESIS”. International Journal of Current Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 15, no. 4, July 2023, pp. 23-25, doi:10.22159/ijcpr.2023v15i4.3018.

Issue

Section

Original Article(s)