• Users Online: 32
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 34  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 77-81

A prospective randomized double-blinded study of dexmedetomidine versus propofol infusion for orbital surgeries


1 Department and Institution, Orbit, Oculoplasty, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Services, Chennai, India
2 Department of Anesthesia, Sankara Nethralaya, Medical Research Foundation, Chennai, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Bipasha Mukherjee
Orbit, Oculoplasty, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Services, Sankara Nethralaya, Medical Research Foundation, 18, College Road, Chennai - 600 006, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1319-4534.305021

Rights and Permissions

PURPOSE: Orbital surgeries are traditionally taken up under general anesthesia. Local anesthesia combined with moderate sedation can also be considered as an alternative option. This study was performed to compare the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine and propofol infusion for orbital surgeries under local anesthesia. METHODS: Twenty patients undergoing orbital surgery by a single surgeon were enrolled in this prospective randomized study. Selected patients were randomly administered dexmedetomidine (Group D) or propofol (Group P). Hemodynamic and respiratory effects, sedation levels, recovery profile, analgesic properties, and satisfaction levels of the patients and the surgeon were assessed. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in mean arterial pressures following drug administration compared to initial measurements in both the groups. However, a statistically significant decrease in heart rate was observed only in Group P. The sedation score at the end of loading dose was 3.3 ± 0.82 in Group D and 2.5 ± 0.52 in Group P and this difference was also statistically significant (P value-0.027). The surgeon's satisfaction score was 6.5 ± 0.71 in Group D and 5.6 ± 1.07 in Group P (P value – 0.045). There were no statistically significant differences observed in patients' satisfaction, pain, and anxiety scores in either group. No major hemodynamic changes or complications were noted in either of the groups. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine, in comparison to propofol, provides better sedation levels with good hemodynamic stability. It also offers better surgeon satisfaction, thus providing a useful alternative for general anesthesia in selective patients undergoing orbital surgery.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed94    
    Printed8    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded13    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal