Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Dexamethasone As Adjuvants to Ultra-Sound Guided Interscalene Block in Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: A Double-Blinded Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study Publisher



Margulis R1 ; Francis J1 ; Tischenkel B1 ; Bromberg A1 ; Pedulla D2 ; Grtisenko K2 ; Cornett EM3 ; Kaye AD3 ; Imani F4 ; Imani F4 ; Shaparin N1 ; Vydyanathan A1
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, United States
  2. 2. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, United States
  3. 3. LSU Health Shreveport, Department of Anesthesiology, Shreveport, LA, United States
  4. 4. Pain Research Center, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  5. 5. Department of Anesthesiology, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Source: Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine Published:2021


Abstract

Background: Interscalene block is one of the popular methods for decreasing pain and analgesic consumption after shoulder arthroscopic surgeries. Objectives: The objective is to compare the analgesic duration of effects of dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone as adjuvants to 0.5% ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided interscalene blocks for arthroscopic shoulder surgery in an ambulatory setting. Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 117 adult patients candidate for ambulatory arthroscopic shoulder surgery under general anesthesia were divided into three groups to perform an ultra-sound guided interscalene block before the surgery. The ropivacaine (control) group received ropivacaine 0.5% 20 mL, group Dexamethasone received ropivacaine 0.5% 20 mL plus 4mg dexamethasone, and group dexmedetomidine received ropivacaine 0.5% 20 mL plus 75 mcg of dexmedetomidine. Time to return of sensory function, of motor function, of first pain sensation, amount of opioid medication consumed at 24 hours and 48 hours post-operatively were measured. Results: The 24-hour median (25th-75th percentile) opioid consumption in morphine equivalents was similar between groups 22.5 mg (10-30), 15 mg (0-30), and 15 mg (0-20.6) in the ropivacaine, dexmedetomidine, and dexamethasone groups, respectively (P = 0.130). The median (25th-75th percentile) 48 hours post-operatively, the median opioid consumption in morphine equivalents was 40 mg (25-67.5) in the ropivacaine group, 30 mg (22-50.6) in the dexamethasone group, and 52.5 mg (30-75) in the dexmedetomidine group (P = 0.278). The median 24-hour pain scores were 6 (5-8) in the ropivacaine control group, 7 (5.5-8) in the dexamethasone group, and 7 (4-9) in the dexmedetomidine group (P = 0.573). Conclusions: There was no statistical difference in opioid consumption at 24 and 48 hours post-operatively when comparing dexmedetomidine, dexamethasone, and no adjuvant. However, intraoperative opioid use was significantly lower with dexmedetomidine compared to dexamethasone and plain 0.5% ropivacaine. The safe side effect profile of dexmedetomidine makes it a reasonable alternative as an adjuvant for peripheral nerve blockade when dexamethasone use may be contraindicated. © 2021, Author(s).