Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Anestesiologica > Past Issues > Minerva Anestesiologica 2008 September;74(9) > Minerva Anestesiologica 2008 September;74(9):469-74



A Journal on Anesthesiology, Resuscitation, Analgesia and Intensive Care

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Anesthesiology, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care
Indexed/Abstracted in: Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,036

Frequency: Monthly

ISSN 0375-9393

Online ISSN 1827-1596


Minerva Anestesiologica 2008 September;74(9):469-74


Dexmedetomidine-based versus fentanyl-based total intravenous anesthesia for lumbar laminectomy

Turgut N. 1, Turkmen A. 1, Gökkaya S. 1, Altan A. 1, Hatiboglu M. A. 2

1 Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Ministry of Health, Okmeydani Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey;
2 Department of Neurosurgery, Ministry of Health, Okmeydani Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

Background. The present study was designed to show the effects of dexmedetomidine infusion with loading dosage on perioperative hemodynamics, propofol consumption, and postoperative recovery when used for general anesthesia in patients undergoing spinal laminectomy.
Methods. Fifty American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II patients were randomised into two groups. Group D received dexmedetomidine 0.6 µgkg-1 as bolus before induction and 0.2 µgkg-1h-1 by infusion. Group F received fentanyl 1 µgkg-1 as bolus before induction and 0.5 µgkg-1 h-1 by infusion. Signs of inadequate analgesia, defined as an increase in heart rate and mean arterial pressure (MAP) 20% above the baseline, were managed by increasing or decreasing the dosage of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl. Statistical analysis was performed with student t, χ2 and Fisher’s exact tests.
Results. The maintenance dosage was 0.64±0.06 µgkg-1h-1 for fentanyl in Group F and 0.31±0.08 µgkg-1h-1 for dexmedetomidine in Group D. MAP values in Group D were significantly higher than in Group F only after intubation. Before and after extubation, MAP values in Group F were significantly higher than those in Group D. There was no statistical difference in heart rate between the groups. Propofol dosages for induction (1.40±0.48 mgkg-1) and maintenance of anesthesia (2.03±0.41 mgkg-1) were lower with dexmedetomidine. Extubation time and postanesthesia care unit discharge time were similar in both groups. The fentanyl group patients required supplemental analgesia earlier than the dexmedetomidine group (34.8±1.35 min vs 60.4±1.04 min). Postoperative nausea and vomiting were significantly higher in Group F.
Conclusion. In conclusion, propofol-dexmedetomidine is suitable for patients undergoing elective spinal laminectomy and provides stable perioperative hemodynamic responses. Propofol-fentanyl medication requires a higher dosage of postoperative analgesics and causes frequent postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with propofol-dexmedetomidine.

language: English


top of page