ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2017
Dexmedetomidine as an Additive to Spinal Anaesthesia in Orthopaedic Patients Undergoing Lower Limb Surgeries: A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Two Different Doses of Dexmedetomidine.
Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of preoperative intranasal dexmedetomidine on characteristics of spinal anesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine for lower limb orthopedic surgery: a double-blinded randomized control study.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2025Trial
- Clinical Experience With Thoracic Segmental Spinal Anesthesia in High-Risk Surgical Patients.Case reports in anesthesiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Intrathecal Dexmedetomidine Combined With Ropivacaine in Cesarean Section: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Study.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Efficacy of premixed versus succedent administration of fentanyl and bupivacaine in subarachnoid block for lower limb surgeries: A randomised control trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2020Article
- Comparison of Morphine and Dexmedetomidine as Adjuvants to Isobaric Levobupivacaine for Spinal Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Hysterectomy.Anesthesia, essays and researchesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUse of dexmedetomidine as an additive to spinal anaesthesia is gaining popularity; but there seems to be no clear consensus on the ideal dose to be used. Because of dose related prolongation of duration of motor blockade along with increase in the incidence of side effects of dexmedetomidine namely hypotension and bradycardia, use of higher doses is not recommended.
aimTo evaluate the efficacy of two different doses of dexmedetomidine (3 μg and 5 μg) given in combination with 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine via intrathecal route with regard to the quality of anaesthesia namely the time to attain highest sensory and motor blockade, side effects of dexmedetomidine and time to first rescue analgesia. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty American Society of Anaesthesiologist (ASA) Grade I and II orthopaedic patients undergoing lower limb surgeries between the ages of 20-60 years and height >150 cm were randomly divided into two groups of 30 patients each: Group D3 to receive 3 μg of Inj. Dexmedetomidine (0.5 ml, reconstituted using normal saline) along with 12.5 mg (2.5 ml) of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine and Group D5 to receive 5 μg of inj. Dexmedetomidine (0.5 ml, reconstituted using normal saline) along with 12.5 mg (2.5 ml) of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine keeping the total volume of study drug constant in all 60 patients (3 ml). Data recordings were done for time to reach best sensory and motor block, intraoperative haemodynamic changes and time to first postoperative rescue analgesia. Statistical analysis was done using student's t-test and Chi-square test with p-value of <0.05 considered to be significant.
resultsThe two groups analysed were similar in terms of demographic profile, time to reach highest sensory block (T10) dermatome, time to reach Bromage scale 4, time to surgical incision after spinal and the total duration of surgery (p>0.05). The change in haemodynamics was similar (p>0.05). A statistically significant difference (p<0.001) was observed in time to first rescue analgesia after skin closure with Group D3 having 206.47 minutes while in Group D5 the time was 271.33 minutes.
conclusionUsed in a dose of 5 μg (in 0.5 ml volume) as an additive in spinal anaesthesia maximal beneficial effect of dexmedetomidine can be obtained without any side effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.