International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology
2022, Vol. 5, Issue 3, Part A
The comparison of clonidine and dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to 0.5% bupivacaine in epidural anaesthesia for lower limb surgeries
Author(s): Kanhaiya Kumar and Ajeet Kumar
Background and Objectives: Epidural anesthesia is a popular technique for providing anesthesia for lower limb surgeries. Dexmedetomidine and Clonidine are known to enhance the effect of local anaesthetics. The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of dexmedetomidine and clonidine on the onset and duration of epidural anaesthesia using bupivacaine.
Methods: After IEC approval, a prospective, randomized, double blinded study was conducted on 60 ASA I and II adult patients undergoing lower limb surgeries under epidural anaesthesia. Patients were randomly divided into Group A receiving 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine 15 ml with dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg and Group B receiving 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine 15 ml with clonidine 2 μg/kg epidurally. Onset and duration of sensory and motor blocks, duration of analgesia, sedation, and adverse effects were assessed.
Results: The onset of sensory and motor block was significantly faster in Gr A compared to Gr B (p< 0.05). The duration of sensory and motor block was significantly more in Gr D compared to Gr M. Mean arterial pressures were comparable between the groups in the intraoperative period. However, sedation scores with dexmedetomidine were better than clonidine. No other adverse event was observed.
Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine in combination with 15 ml bupivacaine (0.5%) hastened onset of sensory and motor block, and prolonged the duration of sensory and motor block when used for epidural, without producing any adverse events.
Pages: 01-06 | Views: 193 | Downloads: 106
Download Full Article: Click Here
How to cite this article:
Kanhaiya Kumar, Ajeet Kumar. The comparison of clonidine and dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to 0.5% bupivacaine in epidural anaesthesia for lower limb surgeries. Int J Med Anesthesiology 2022;5(3):01-06. DOI: 10.33545/26643766.2022.v5.i2a.352