• Yoshiaki Terao, Taiga Ichinomiya, Ushio Higashijima, Tomomi Tanise, Kosuke Miura, Makoto Fukusaki, and Koji Sumikawa.
• Department of Anesthesia, Nagasaki Rosai Hospital, 2-12-5 Setogoe, Sasebo 857-0134, Japan. yoterao@na-robyo.jp
• J Anesth. 2012 Apr 1;26(2):179-86.

PurposePatients undergoing extensive cervical spine surgery (ECSS) occasionally require emergency reintubation due to postoperative airway complications. To avoid it, an endotracheal tube is retained in patients maintained under sedation overnight. This study was conducted to determine whether dexmedetomidine would be superior in sedative effects to propofol for postoperative sedation after ECSS.MethodsWe studied 32 consecutive patients undergoing ECSS who required prophylactic intubation postoperatively under sedation overnight. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group D (n = 16) received dexmedetomidine 0.1 μg/kg/min for 10 min as a loading dose, followed by a continuous infusion at 0.4 μg/kg/h. Group P (n = 16) received propofol 0.1 mg/kg/min for 10 min as a loading dose, followed by a continuous infusion at 1 mg/kg/h. All patients received analgesia with buprenorphine. Ramsay sedation scale, extremity movement, and pain intensity were recorded every 2 h. Dexmedetomidine and propofol dosages were adjusted to maintain a desired sedation level. Nursing staff adjusted dopamine to maintain systolic blood pressure >100 mmHg and administered atropine when the heart rate was <50 bpm.ResultsThe proportions of adequate sedation level, movement, and pain status were similar between groups. In group D, heart rates were lower, frequency of atropine use was greater, and dopamine dose was higher than in group P.ConclusionBoth sedatives are efficacious after ECSS; however, dexmedetomidine decreased heart rate and required higher dose of dopamine.

32 keywords...

hide…