JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by McCutcheon, C. A. Articles by McGlade, D. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by McCutcheon, C. A. Articles by McGlade, D. P. Related Collections Cardiovascular Anesthetic Techniques Pharmacology

---

CARDIOVASCULAR ANESTHESIA

A Comparison of Dexmedetomidine Versus Conventional Therapy for Sedation and Hemodynamic Control During Carotid Endarterectomy Performed Under Regional Anesthesia

Department of Anaesthesia, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Craig A McCutcheon, MBBS, FANZCA, Department of Anaesthesia, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, PO Box 2900, Fitzroy 3065, Victoria, Australia. Address e-mail to craig.mccutcheon{at}svhm.org.au.

The properties of dexmedetomidine (DEX) that result in titratable sedation and sympathetic modulation suggest that it would be suitable for use during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) performed under regional anesthesia. We performed a randomized, double-blind study in 56 patients having CEA under regional anesthesia and compared hemodynamic control using DEX versus a conventional sedation technique using midazolam and fentanyl standard (STD). Sedation was titrated to a Ramsay Sedation Score of 2–4 in both groups. The primary outcome was the number of pharmacological interventions required to treat deviations of arterial blood pressure and heart rate outside of predetermined limits. We also compared recovery hemodynamic profiles, patient satisfaction, and adverse cardiac and neurological events. There was no difference in the overall rate of hemodynamic interventions (DEX 80% versus STD 79%; P = 1.0). However, the nature of interventions differed in that patients in the DEX group were less likely to require treatment for hypertension and/or tachycardia (DEX 40% versus STD 72%; P = 0.03). The number of interventions per patient for hypertension and/or tachycardia was also lesser in the DEX group (P = 0.02). There were no significant differences in the numbers of patients needing intraoperative treatment for hypotension or bradycardia or in the need for intraarterial shunting. In the postanesthesia care unit, more patients in the DEX group required hemodynamic drug interventions (DEX 11, 44%, versus STD 4, 14%; P = 0.03). These were primarily for hypotension (DEX 7, 28% versus STD 3, 11%; P = 0.16). The number of patients requiring no additional pain relief in the postanesthesia care unit was significantly larger for patients in the DEX group (DEX 18, 72% versus STD 11, 38%; P = 0.027). DEX provides an acceptable alternative, without superiority to standard techniques for sedation during awake CEA.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. J. Heyer, M. I. Gold, E. W. Kirby, J. Zurica, E. Mitchell, H. J. Halazun, L. Teverbaugh, R. R. Sciacca, R. A. Solomon, D. O. Quest, et al. A Study of Cognitive Dysfunction in Patients Having Carotid Endarterectomy Performed with Regional Anesthesia Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2008; 107(2): 636 - 642. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. T Gerlach and J. F Dasta Dexmedetomidine: An Updated Review Ann. Pharmacother., February 1, 2007; 41(2): 245 - 252. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Bekker, M. Gold, R. Ahmed, J. Kim, C. Rockman, G. Jacobovitz, T. Riles, and G. Fisch Dexmedetomidine Does Not Increase the Incidence of Intracarotid Shunting in Patients Undergoing Awake Carotid Endarterectomy Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2006; 103(4): 955 - 958. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999