Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38645991›Full record

ArticleDrug design, development and therapy2024

Dexamethasone versus Dexmedetomidine as Adjuvants in Ultrasound Popliteal Sciatic Nerve Block for Hallux Valgus Surgery: A Mono-Centric Retrospective Comparative Study.

Antonio Coviello, Carmine Iacovazzo, Dario Cirillo, Alessio Bernasconi, Annachiara Marra, Francesco Squillacioti, Marco Martone, Eleonora Garone, Filomena Coppola, Andrea Uriel de Siena and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Drug design, development and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Antonio Coviello *Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2298-566X
Carmine Iacovazzo *Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Dario CirilloDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3554-8442
Alessio BernasconiDepartment of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Naples "Federico II", Unit of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9427-3178
Annachiara MarraDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Francesco SquillaciotiDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Marco MartoneDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Eleonora GaroneDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Filomena CoppolaDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Andrea Uriel de SienaDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7909-1387
Maria VargasDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Giuseppe ServilloDepartment of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Federico II University Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aim: Ultrasound popliteal sciatic nerve block (UPSNB) is commonly performed in foot and ankle surgery. This study aims to assess the use of dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone as adjuvants in UPSNB for hallux valgus (HV) surgery, comparing their efficacy in producing motor and sensory block and controlling postoperative pain. The adverse event rate was also evaluated. Methods: This mono-centric retrospective study included 62 adult patients undergoing HV surgery: 30 patients received lidocaine 2% 200 mg, ropivacaine 0.5% 50 mg and dexamethasone 4 mg (Group 1), whereas 32 patients received lidocaine 2% 200 mg, ropivacaine 0.5% 50 mg, and dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/Kg (Group 2). At first, the visual analogue scale (VAS) was evaluated after 48 hours. The other outcomes were time to motor block regression, evaluation of the first analgesic drug intake, analgesic effect, adverse effects (hemodynamic disorders, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV)) and patient satisfaction. The continuous data were analyzed with student's Results: No significant difference was found in VAS after 48 hours (4.5 ± 1.6 vs 4.7 ± 1.7, p = 0.621) to motor block regression (18.9 ± 6.0 vs 18.7 ± 6, p = 0.922). The number of patients that took their first analgesic drug in the first 48 h (p = 0.947 at 6 hours; p = 0.421 at 12 hours; p = 0.122 at 24 hours and p = 0.333 at 48 hours) were not significant. A low and similar incidence of intraoperative hemodynamic disorders was recorded in both groups (hypotension p = 0.593; bradycardia p = 0.881). Neither PONV nor other complication was found. Patients in Group 1 reported a lower degree of interference with sleep (p = 0.001), less interference with daily activities (P = 0.002) and with the affective sphere (P = 0.015) along with a more satisfactory postoperative pain management (p < 0.001) as compared to Group 2. Conclusion: No significant differences were observed in the duration of motor and sensory blockade between patients in both groups. Additionally, both groups showed good pain control with a low rate of adverse effects, even if there was no clinical difference between the groups. However, patients who received dexamethasone reported experiencing less interference with their sleep, daily activities and overall emotional well-being, and overall pain control.

Indexed as

DexamethasoneDexmedetomidineHallux ValgusNerve BlockSciatic NerveAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative PainRetrospective StudiesUltrasonographyDexamethasoneDexmedetomidineadjuvants in peripheral nerve blocksdexamethasonedexmedetomidineHallux valgusultrasound popliteal sciatic nerve block

Identifiers

PMID38645991
PMCPMC11032716
OpenAlexW4394888323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.