SynthesisBMC anesthesiology2026
Effects of dexmedetomidine vs. magnesium sulfate on hemodynamics in spine surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBlood loss and hemodynamic instability are common challenges in spine surgery, often managed with controlled hypotension. Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist, and magnesium sulfate (MgSO₄), an NMDA receptor antagonist and calcium channel blocker, are commonly used for this purpose, but their comparative efficacy and safety remain unclear. This comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis aim to critically evaluate and compare the hemodynamic effects of both drugs in spinal surgeries.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, searching PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to August 15, 2025. We identified randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous DEX vs. MgSO₄ in spine surgeries. Outcomes included blood loss; changes in mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP); recovery time; first time to analgesic needs; total opioid consumption; extubation time; and incidence of bradycardia and tachycardia. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effects models.
resultsAnalysis of nine RCTs involving 463 patients showed that DEX significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 1.447 mL; p = 0.009), SBP (MD = - 0.448 mmHg; p = 0.012), tachycardia (RR = 0.330; p = 0.004), and prolonged the time to first analgesic request (MD = 1.409 min; p = 0.004). DEX was associated with an increased risk of bradycardia (RR = 4.819; p = 0.001) and delayed MAP recovery (p = 0.030). No significant differences were observed for MAP, HR, DBP, recovery time, postoperative opioid use, extubation time, or ephedrine requirement. Several outcomes showed high heterogeneity.
conclusionsOur study showed that dexmedetomidine offers superior blood-sparing and analgesic effects compared to magnesium sulfate but carries a higher risk of bradycardia and delayed MAP recovery. Magnesium sulfate remains effective for analgesia and muscle relaxation. Larger, well-designed RCTs are required to validate these findings and guide drug selection in spine surgery. Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted with caution, given the extremely high heterogeneity observed across several pooled outcomes, which considerably constrains the reliability and generalizability of the estimates.
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.