• Kamath Sriganesh, Madhusudan Reddy, Sritam Jena, Mohit Mittal, and G S Umamaheswara Rao.
• Department of Neuroanaesthesia, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), Bangalore, 560029, India. drsri23@rediffmail.com.
• J Anesth. 2015 Jun 1; 29 (3): 409-415.

PurposeSubarachnoid hemorrhage is an acute neurological emergency requiring urgent confirmation of the diagnosis for planning definitive management. Due to altered consciousness, most patients require sedation for conducting this procedure smoothly. Currently, it is unclear if any one particular sedative drug has a favorable profile in patients undergoing cerebral angiography. The aim of this study was to compare the traditionally used sedative drug propofol with a newer alternative, dexmedetomidine, in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage undergoing cerebral angiography.MethodsSixty adult patients with good grade subarachnoid hemorrhage undergoing diagnostic cerebral angiography were prospectively randomized to receive either propofol (n = 30) or dexmedetomidine (n = 30) following ethics committee approval and informed consent.ResultsCompared to dexmadetomidine, propofol was associated with an earlier time for onset of sedation (2.3 ± 1.9 min vs. 15.4 ± 5.7 min; P < 0.001), but with an increased number of adverse respiratory events (11/30 vs 1/30; P = 0.003) and movement during the procedure (5/30 vs. 0/30; P = 0.05), necessitating additional supplementation of sedation (13/30 vs. 7/30; P = 0.17) and repetition of the imaging sequences. The total procedure time and time for recovery were similar for the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups, while the heart rate was lower in patients in the dexmedetomidine group.ConclusionDexmedetomidine appears to be superior to propofol as a sole sedative agent for sedation during cerebral angiography in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage.

22 keywords...

hide…