| Title |
Awake craniotomy anesthetic management using dexmedetomidine, propofol, and remifentanil
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s124736 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrea Prontera, Stefano Baroni, Andrea Marudi, Franco Valzania, Alberto Feletti, Francesca Benuzzi, Elisabetta Bertellini, Giacomo Pavesi |
| Abstract |
Awake craniotomy allows continuous monitoring of patients' neurological functions during open surgery. Anesthesiologists have to sedate patients in a way so that they are compliant throughout the whole surgical procedure, nevertheless maintaining adequate analgesia and anxiolysis. Currently, the use of α2-receptor agonist dexmedetomidine as the primary hypnotic-sedative medication is increasing. Nine patients undergoing awake craniotomy were treated with refined monitored anesthesia care (MAC) protocol consisting of a combination of local anesthesia without scalp block, low-dose infusion of dexmedetomidine, propofol, and remifentanil, without the need of airways management. The anesthetic protocol applied in our study has the advantage of decreasing the dose of each drug and thus reducing the occurrence of side effects. All patients had smooth and rapid awakenings. The brain remained relaxed during the entire procedure. In our experience, this protocol is safe and effective during awake brain surgery. Nevertheless, prospective randomized trials are necessary to confirm the optimal anesthetic technique to be used. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 68 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 19% |
| Unknown | 25 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 41% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 27 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2020.
All research outputs
#21,011,157
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,462
of 2,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,940
of 325,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#39
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,582 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.