Skip to content

Comparison Between Intrathecal and Intravenous Dexmedetomidine

Comparison Study Between Intrathecal and Intravenous Dexmedetomidine in Lower Limb Surgeries

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04374318
Enrollment
70
Registered
2020-05-05
Start date
2019-03-01
Completion date
2020-03-30
Last updated
2020-05-07

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Postoperative Analgesia

Brief summary

A prospective, randomized, comparative controlled clinical trial, aiming to compare the use of intrathecal dexmedetomidine by intravenous dexmedetomidine in concern of the first request to analgesia. The secondary end-points were the total postoperative analgesic consumption as well as the VAS.

Detailed description

Seventy patients undergoing lower limb surgeries were included in this study. Using a random number sequence, patients were enrolled in one of two groups: Group T receiving 5 µg of dexmedetomidine (Precedex® 100 µg/mL, Hospira, Inc., IL, U.S.A.) combined with 12.5 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine (Marcaine® Spinal Heavy; Astra, Sodertalje, Sweden) and Group V receiving the same bupivacaine DOSE AND 0.75 microgram/kilogram of body weight dexmedetomidine intravenously. Dexmedetomidine 100 µg/mL was mixed with preservative-free normal saline to 10 µg/mL. The 0.5 mL of dilute dexmedetomidine was added to the bupivacaine in group T. An independent investigator prepared the drug solutions and provided the coded drug to the anaesthetic administrator before the start of the anaesthesia. The anaesthetic administrator, patients, outcome assessors, and data analysts were blinded to the allocation. Spinal Anesthesia Patients were hydrated with 500 mL of 0.9% sodium chloride solution before anaesthesia. The spinal puncture was performed at L3-4 or L4-5 with a midline approach using a 25 G Quincke needle in the lateral decubitus position. After confirmation of free flow and clear cerebrospinal fluid, the drug was administered and the patients were then placed in the supine neutral position. Assessment: The primary end-point of this study was the first request to analgesia. The secondary end-points were the total postoperative analgesic consumption as well as the VAS.

Interventions

DRUGDexmedetomidine

INTRATHECAL AND INTRAVENOUS

Sponsors

Suez Canal University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

double blinded

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* ASA I-II patients * age 18-65 years * scheduled for lower limb surgery * spinal anaesthesia

Exclusion criteria

* patients with coagulopathy * infection at the site of lumbar puncture * beta-blockers or calcium channel blockers usage * hypersensitivity to Bupivacaine or Dexmedetomidine * any other contra-indications for spinal anaesthesia.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
First request to analgesiaPostoperative up to 24 hoursThe first time the patient is asking for analgesia to control his pain

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Total postoperative analgesia consumptionPostoperative up to 24 hoursTotal consumption of analgesia to control pain
visual analogue scaleEvery two hours for 24 hours postoperativeThe score subjectively measures the severity of pain and it is ranging from 0 when there is no pain to 10 when it is the worse pain imaginable

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026