Andersen Jakob Hessel, Jaeger Pia, Grevstad Ulrik, Estrup Stine, Geisler Anja, Vilhelmsen Frederik, Dahl Jorgen B, Laier Gunnar Hellmund, Ilfeld Brian M, Mathiesen Ole
Department of Anesthesiology, Zealand University Hospital, Koege, Denmark
Department of Anesthesiology, Rigshospitalet, Kobenhavn, Denmark.
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Mar;44(3):333-340. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2018-100089. Epub 2019 Jan 23.
We tested the joint hypotheses that both perineural and systemic dexmedetomidine prolong the duration of an ulnar nerve block (UNB) compared with ropivacaine alone and that systemic dexmedetomidine is noninferior compared with perineural dexmedetomidine in block prolongation.
We performed bilateral UNBs in 22 healthy volunteers on two separate days. On the first day, each arm was randomized to either 4 mL ropivacaine 5 mg/mL+1 mL dexmedetomidine 100 µg/mL (Perineural) or 4 mL ropivacaine 5 mg/mL+1 mL saline (Systemic). On the subsequent treatment day, each arm was randomized to 1 mL of saline plus 4 mL of ropivacaine at either 7.5 mg/mL(HiRopi) or 5 mg/mL (NoDex). The primary outcome measure was the duration of sensory block assessed by mechanical discrimination.
Mean sensory block duration was longer in both the Perineural (14.4 hours, 95% CI 13.1 to 15.6) and Systemic treatments (9.2 hours, 95% CI 8.6 to 9.8) compared with the NoDex treatment (7.1 hours, 95% CI 6.6 to 7.6) (p<0.0001 for both). Systemic dexmedetomidine was inferior (not noninferior) compared with perineural dexmedetomidine, as the 95% CI of the difference (mean difference 5.2 hour, 95% CI 4.2 to 6.1) exceeded the noninferiority limit of 3.6 hour. Onset time did not differ among the groups. The other test modalities demonstrated similar block durations as the primary outcome.
Adding dexmedetomidine perineurally to ropivacaine doubles the duration of an UNB. Systemic dexmedetomidine also prolongs the duration of UNB, but has less of an effect compared with the perineural route.
NCT03222323.
我们检验了以下联合假设:与单独使用罗哌卡因相比,神经周围和全身应用右美托咪定均可延长尺神经阻滞(UNB)的持续时间,且在延长阻滞时间方面,全身应用右美托咪定不劣于神经周围应用右美托咪定。
我们在22名健康志愿者身上于两个不同日期进行了双侧UNB。第一天,每只手臂随机分为接受4 mL 5 mg/mL罗哌卡因+1 mL 100 μg/mL右美托咪定(神经周围组)或4 mL 5 mg/mL罗哌卡因+1 mL生理盐水(全身组)。在随后的治疗日,每只手臂随机接受1 mL生理盐水加4 mL 7.5 mg/mL(高浓度罗哌卡因组)或5 mg/mL(无右美托咪定组)的罗哌卡因。主要结局指标是通过机械辨别评估的感觉阻滞持续时间。
与无右美托咪定组(7.1小时,95%CI 6.6至7.6)相比,神经周围组(14.4小时,95%CI 13.1至15.6)和全身治疗组(9.2小时,95%CI 8.6至9.8)的平均感觉阻滞持续时间均更长(两者p<0.0001)。全身应用右美托咪定劣于(非不劣于)神经周围应用右美托咪定,因为差异的95%CI(平均差异5.2小时,95%CI 4.2至6.1)超过了3.6小时的非劣效性界限。各组之间的起效时间无差异。其他测试方式显示出与主要结局相似的阻滞持续时间。
在罗哌卡因中神经周围添加右美托咪定可使UNB的持续时间加倍。全身应用右美托咪定也可延长UNB的持续时间,但与神经周围途径相比效果较小。
NCT03222323。