2023PubMedRequires access

Dexmedetomidine vs. propofol sedation reduces the duration of mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery - a randomized controlled trial.

M Preveden, Ranko Zdravković, Sanja Vicković, Vanja Vujic, Mirko Todić, Nikola Mladenović, Nina Dračina, Vanja Drljević Todić, Tijana Pantić, Bogdan Okiljević, Nikolina Markovic, Aleksandra Kovač, Ronald F. Zec, Andrej Preveden, Milanka Tatić

Open publisher page 11 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare the clinical effects of sedation with dexmedetomidine vs. propofol in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and analyze their effects on the duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), and total hospital stay. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 120 patients who were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two groups of 60 patients. The first group was sedated with continuous dexmedetomidine in doses 0.2-0.7 mcg/kg/h. The second group was sedated with propofol in doses 1-2 mg/kg/h. RESULTS: Patients sedated with dexmedetomidine required 2.2 hours less time on MV (p<0.001). There was a positive correlation between the duration of MV and the ICU length of stay (r=0.368; p<0.001), as well as between the duration of MV and the total hospital stay (r=0.204; p=0.025). Delirium occurred in the postoperative period in 25% of patients sedated with propofol, while in the dexmedetomidine group it was only 11.7% (p=0.059). Patients who developed delirium had a significantly longer duration of MV (12.6±5.4 vs. 9.3±2.5 hours, p=0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative sedation with dexmedetomidine, compared to propofol, reduces the duration of MV, but does not influence the length of stay in the ICU and length of hospitalization after open heart surgery.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare the clinical effects of sedation with dexmedetomidine vs. propofol in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and analyze their effects on the duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), and total hospital stay. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 120 patients who were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two groups of 60 patients. The first group was sedated with continuous dexmedetomidine in doses 0.2-0.7 mcg/kg/h. The second group was sedated with propofol in doses 1-2 mg/kg/h. RESULTS: Patients sedated with dexmedetomidine required 2.2 hours less time on MV (p<0.001). There was a positive correlation between the duration of MV and the ICU length of stay (r=0.368; p<0.001), as well as between the duration of MV and the total hospital stay (r=0.204; p=0.025). Delirium occurred in the postoperative period in 25% of patients sedated with propofol, while in the dexmedetomidine group it was only 11.7% (p=0.059). Patients who developed delirium had a significantly longer duration of MV (12.6±5.4 vs. 9.3±2.5 hours, p=0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative sedation with dexmedetomidine, compared to propofol, reduces the duration of MV, but does not influence the length of stay in the ICU and length of hospitalization after open heart surgery.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 11 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare the clinical effects of sedation with dexmedetomidine vs. propofol in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and analyze their effects on the duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), and total hospital stay. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 120 patients who were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two groups of 60 patients. The first group was sedated with continuous dexmedetomidine in doses 0.2-0.7 mcg/kg/h. The second group was sedated with propofol in doses 1-2 mg/kg/h. RESULTS: Patients sedated with dexmedetomidine required 2.2 hours less time on MV (p<0.001). There was a positive correlation between the duration of MV and the ICU length of stay (r=0.368; p<0.001), as well as between the duration of MV and the total hospital stay (r=0.204; p=0.025). Delirium occurred in the postoperative period in 25% of patients sedated with propofol, while in the dexmedetomidine group it was only 11.7% (p=0.059). Patients who developed delirium had a significantly longer duration of MV (12.6±5.4 vs. 9.3±2.5 hours, p=0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative sedation with dexmedetomidine, compared to propofol, reduces the duration of MV, but does not influence the length of stay in the ICU and length of hospitalization after open heart surgery.

Key concepts: Dexmedetomidine, Propofol, Medicine, Sedation, Anesthesia, Mechanical ventilation, Delirium, Intensive care unit

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Dexmedetomidine vs. propofol sedation reduces the duration of mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery - a randomized controlled trial. — Research Paper | ScholarLens