Dexmedetomidine infusion as an anesthetic adjuvant to general anesthesia for appropriate surgical field visibility during modified radical mastectomy with i-gel®: a randomized control study / 대한마취과학회지

BACKGROUND: Modified radical mastectomy is associated with appreciable blood loss, while endotracheal intubation leads to elevated hemodynamic responses. The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of dexmedetomidine infusion as an anesthetic adjuvant to general anesthesia during modified radical mastectomy with I-Gel. METHODS: Sixty adult consenting female patients, of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 to 2 and aged 4,065 years, were blindly randomized into two groups of 30 patients each. The patients in Group I received intravenous dexmedetomidine at a loading dose of 1 µg/kg over 10 min, followed by maintenance infusion of 0.4 to 0.7 µg/kg/h, while patients in Group II were administered an identical amount of saline infusion until 15 min prior to the end of surgery. The primary end point was bleeding at the surgical field and hemodynamic changes; requirement of isoflurane, intraoperative fentanyl consumption and recovery time were assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The patients receiving dexmedetomidine infusion showed significantly less bleeding at the surgical field (P < 0.05). A statistically significant reduction was also observed in the percentage of isoflurane required (0.82 ± 0.80%) to maintain the systolic blood pressure between 100 and 110 mmHg in patients receiving dexmedetomidine infusion compared with the Group II (1.50 ± 0.90%). The mean intraoperative fentanyl consumption in patients in the Group I was also significantly lower compared with that of the Group II (38.43 ± 5.40 µg vs. 75.12 ± 4.60 µg). The mean recovery time from anesthesia did not show any clinically significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine infusion can be used safely to decrease the bleeding at the surgical field with smooth recovery from anesthesia.

Standard versus Rotation Technique for Insertion of Supraglottic Airway Devices: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE: Supraglottic airway devices have been widely utilized as an alternative to tracheal intubation in various clinical situations. The rotation technique has been proposed to improve the insertion success rate of supraglottic airways. However, the clinical efficacy of this technique remains uncertain as previous results have been inconsistent, depending on the variable evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in April 2015 for randomized controlled trials that compared the rotation and standard techniques for inserting supraglottic airways. RESULTS: Thirteen randomized controlled trials (1505 patients, 753 with the rotation technique) were included. The success rate at the first attempt was significantly higher with the rotation technique than with the standard technique [relative risk (RR): 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05 to 1.23; p=0.002]. The rotation technique provided significantly higher overall success rates (RR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.09; p<0.001). Device insertion was completed faster with the rotation technique (mean difference: -4.6 seconds; 95% CI: -7.37 to -1.74; p=0.002). The incidence of blood staining on the removed device (RR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.47; p<0.001) was significantly lower with the rotation technique. CONCLUSION: The rotation technique provided higher first-attempt and overall success rates, faster insertion, and a lower incidence of blood on the removed device, reflecting less mucosal trauma. Thus, it may be considered as an alternative to the standard technique when predicting or encountering difficulty in inserting supraglottic airways.