| Title |
Comparison of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl as local anesthetic adjuvants in spinal anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s146092 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
ShuJun Sun, JiaMei Wang, NaRen Bao, Ying Chen, Jun Wang |
| Abstract |
To compare the effects of dexmedetomidine (Dex) and fentanyl as adjuvants to local anesthetics in spinal anesthesia. Two researchers independently searched the PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and CBM for randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of Dex and fentanyl as adjuvants to local anesthetics for intrathecal injection. A total of 639 patients from nine studies were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that Dex resulted in statistically significant longer duration of stable sensory block (mean difference [MD] =27.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] [9.89, 44.34], P<0.01, I2=97%), sensory block (standardized mean difference [SMD] =3.81; 95% CI [2.35, 5.27], P<0.01, I2=97%), motor block (SMD =3.64; 95% CI [2.19, 5.08], P<0.01, I2=97%), and pain free period (SMD =2.98; 95% CI [1.69, 4.27], P<0.01, I2=96%); reducing the incidence of pruritus (relative risk [RR] =0.15; 95% CI [0.06, 0.39], P<0.01, I2=0%) compared with fentanyl. However, the onset of sensory and motor block, the time to peak sensory level, and the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia, and the side effects (nausea, vomiting, shivering and respiratory depression) were not significantly different between Dex and fentanyl. Compared to fentanyl, Dex as local anesthetics adjuvant in spinal anesthesia prolonged the duration of spinal anesthesia, improved postoperative analgesia, reduced the incidence of pruritus, and did not increase the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 137 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 8% |
| Researcher | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 16% |
| Unknown | 53 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 58 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Unknown | 54 | 39% |
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 15 December 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,753
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#384,359
of 444,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#31
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 444,941 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.