Nitesh Kabra, Paridhi Bangur Kabra and G.V. Charan Kumar
Page: 354-359 | Received 01 Jun 2024, Published online: 24 Jul 2024
Full Text Reference XML File PDF File
Adjuvants added to intrathecal Bupivacaine serve many purposes like increased duration and denser block. They also cause delayed regression of block and complications like urinary retention. Dexmedetomidine and Fentanyl are being used regularly as intrathecal adjuvants. After obtaining Institutional Ethical Committee approval and written informed consent, 150 male patients belonging to ASA Classes I and II scheduled for elective lower limb orthopaedic procedures were randomly allocated into 3 Groups of 50 each, all receiving 4 cc of total drug dose intrathecally. Group (D) included patients receiving 0.5% (H) Bupivacaine and Dexmedetomidine, Group (F) received 0.5% (H) Bupivacaine and Fentanyl and Group (C) received 0.5% (H) Bupivacaine alone. The parameters recorded were onset of sensory blockade, time to achieve Bromage ‘0’, 2 segment regression and time since Spinal Anaesthesia to first episode of urine output. Onset of sensory blockade and time to achieve Bromage 0 was statistically insignificant among all the three groups. 2 segment regression was statistically significant with a p<0.05 between the groups. There was a delay in the first episode of urinary output when Dexmedetomidine was added as an adjuvant to Bupivacaine in neuraxial blockade, compared to Fentanyl and finally, when hyperbaric Bupivacaine was used without any adjuvants. 2 segment regression and first episode of urinary output post‐spinal was statistically significant when Dexmedetomidine and Fentanyl were added to intrathecal Bupivacaine. But, Dexmedetomidine, in addition, has prolonged the urinary retention post operatively compared to Fentanyl and when hyperbaric Bupivacaine was used without any adjuvants.
Nitesh Kabra, Paridhi Bangur Kabra and G.V. Charan Kumar. A Randomised Comparative Study on the Effect of Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine Versus Fentanyl as Adjuvants to Bupivacaine in Elective Orthopaedic Procedures.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36478/10.36478/makrjms.2024.8.354.359
URL: https://www.makhillpublications.co/view-article/1815-9346/10.36478/makrjms.2024.8.354.359