Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol for Sedation in Patients Undergoing Upper Limb Orthopedic Surgery under Regional Anesthesia with Brachial Plexus Block

Abstract

Abstract Background: The search for the ideal sedative during regional anesthesia continues. Propofol is widely as a sedative intraoperatively. It may cause troublesome hemodynamic changes. Dexmedetomidine is an α2 agonist with sedative, anxiolytic, and analgesic properties. In this study, we compared dexmedetomidine with propofol as sedatives during surgeries under brachial plexus block. Materials and Methods: In our study, 70 American Society of Anesthesiologists I Class and II patients about to undergo upper limb surgeries under brachial plexus block were blinded and randomly allocated to receive either propofol (Group P) or dexmedetomidine (Group D) infusion. Brachial plexus block was performed, and after confirmation of adequate sensory and motor block, an initial loading dose of the drug was administered over 10 min, followed by a maintenance dose till the end of the surgery. Titration of the rate of infusion was done so as to maintain Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS) of 3–4 and Bispectral Index (BIS) of 60–80. Hemodynamic and respiratory parameters were monitored intraoperatively. Adverse effects such as hypotension, bradycardia, respiratory depression, and incidence of oversedation and undersedation were also noted. The collected data were evaluated using appropriate statistical tests in SPSS version 22®. P <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The RSS remained at 4 in Group P from 20 min onward and for Group D, RSS remained at 3 after 30 min. Post-induction, there was a reduction in BIS in both the groups, but patients in Group P showed statistically significant lower values of BIS when compared with Group D. The fall in mean arterial pressure was more in Group P as compared to Group D. Nine (25.71%) incidences of hypotension were seen in Group P and none in Group D. The decrease in heart rate was more profound in Group D as compared with Group P and one incidence of bradycardia observed in Group D. The respiratory rate was relatively stable in Group D as compared to Group P. The oxygen saturation (SpO2) values in the majority of the patients in both groups were above 92%, but three patients in Group P had SpO2 <92%. In Group P, 6 (17.14%) incidences of oversedation and 8 (22.85%) incidences of undersedation were observed. In Group D, 7 (20%) incidences of undersedation with no incidence of oversedation were observed. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine at recommended doses has a better sedative property with less effect on hemodynamics and respiration as compared to propofol.