Comparison of the effect of dexmedmotidine and ketamine on controlling pain after cesarean section via intra-peritoneal method

dexmedmotidine and ketamine on controlling pain after cesarean section

Authors

  • Alireza Kamali Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran
  • Maryam Maktabi Department of Gynecology, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran
  • Zoha Khademi Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran
  • Taha Fereidooni Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Arak University of Medical Sciences, Arak, Iran

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22317/jcms.v5i4.598

Keywords:

Intra-peritoneal, Dexmedmotidine, Cesarean Section, Ketamine, Pain Control.

Abstract

Objectives: The present study aimed to compare the effect of dexmedmotidine and ketamine on controlling pain after cesarean section via intra-peritoneal method.

Methods: In this clinical and double-blind clinical trial, patients were randomly divided into two groups (dexmedmotidine and ketamine). In the first group, 5 mg / kg ketamine and 1 mg / kg dexmedetomidine were injected in 100 mg normal saline. Pain score was measured on the basis of the visual analog pain scale during the recovery at 4, 6 and 12 hours after the surgery. The data were then analyzed by SPSS (version 20).

Results: 70 patients participated in the study. The results showed that the mean pain scores were the same in different postoperative hours in patients (P≥0.05). The mean opioid use in the ketamine group was lower than inter-peritoneal dexmedmotidine (P = 0.03). Moreover, the mean postoperative analgesia in the ketamine group was higher than inter-peritoneal dexmedmotidine (P = 0.04).

Conclusion: According to the results, the mean opioid consumed in the ketamine group was less than inter-peritoneal dexmedmotidine. Additionally, the mean postoperative analgesia in the ketamine group was higher than that of inter-peritoneal dimethomidine. Therefore, it can be concluded that ketamine has a better effect on reducing pain after cesarean section.

References

1- Shang AB, Gan TJ. Optimising postoperative pain management in the ambulatory patient. Drugs. 2003; 6(3): 855-67.
2- Agah M, Dabbagh A, Hashemi M. Evaluation of the effect of intravenous magnesium on acute postoperative pain in elective orthopedic surgeries of the lower limb. Pajoohandeh. 2006; 1(1):149-52.
3- Al-Mustafa MM, Abu-Halaweh SA, Aloweidi AS, Murshidi MM, Ammari BA, Awwad ZM. Effect of dexmedetomidine added to spinal bupivacaine for urological procedures. Saudi Med J. 2009; 30(3): 365-70.
4- Festin MR, Laopaiboon M, Eriksson C, Rubertsson C, Astrid Nystedt A, Hildingsson I. Cesarean section Birth. 2011; 4(7): 12-18.
5- Eltzschig HK, Lieberman E, Camann WR. Regional anesthesia and analgesia for labor and delivery. Anesthesia. 2003; 34(8): 319-32.
6- Ghadamgahi HB. Prevalence and causes of cesarean in Semnan. Arch J. 2007; 4(1): 52-8.
7- Wallace D, Leveno K, Cunningham F, Giesecke V. Randomized comparison of general and regional anesthesia for cesarean delivery in pregnancies complicated by severe preeclampisia. Obsetet Gynecol. 1995; 8(6): 193-9.
8- McVey JD, Tobias JD. Dexmedetomidine and ketamine for sedation during spinal anesthesia in children. J Clin. 2010; 22(7): 538-45.
9- Gramke HF, de Rijke JM, van Kleef M. The prevalence of postoperative pain in a cross-sectional group of patients after day case surgery in a university hospital. Clin J Pain. 2007; 2(3):543-48.
10- Madineh H, Rajaei Esfahani M, Ghaherei H, Akhlaghi M, Gangi F. The effect of intravenous low dose ketamine on postoperative pain. Shahrekord university of medical sciences journal. 2005; 7(2): 29-34.
11- Khan M, Raza R, Zafar S. Intraperitoneal lignocain versus bupivacain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy JSurg Res. 2012; 178(6): 62-9.
12- Kahokehr A. Intraperitoneal local anesthetic for postoperative pain. Saudi Journal of Anesthesia. 2013; 7(1):55-60.
13- Argiriadou H, Himmelseher S, Papagiannopoulou P, Georgiou M, Kanakoudis F, Giala M. Improvement of pain treatment after major abdominal surgery by intravenous S-ketamine. Anesth Analg. 2004; 98(5): 1413-8.
14- Selim MF, Elnabtity AM, Hasan AM. Comparative evaluation of epidural bupivacaine - dexmedetomidine and bupivacaine -fentanyl on Doppler velocimetry of uterine and umbilical arteries during labor. J Prenat Med. 2012; 6(3): 47-54.
15- Kamali A, Azadfar R, Pazuki S, Shokrpour M. Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Fentanyl as an Adjuvant to Lidocaine 5% for Spinal Anesthesia in Women Candidate for Elective Caesarean. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2018;6(10):1862–1867.
16- Cunningham F. Martin TC, Bell P, Ogunbiyi I. Comperation of general anesthesia and spinal anesthesia for cesarean section in Antigua and Barbuda. West Indian med J. 2007; 5(6): 330-3.
17- Shohani M, Rasoli M, Maleki F. Comparasion Study of Pain After Cesarean Section by General and Spinal Anesthesia. Scientific Journal of Ilam University of Medical Sciences. 2012; 21(3): 17-25.
18- Moharari Sgariat R, Hadavi M, Pourfakhr P, Najafi A, Etezadi F. Evaluation of the postoperative analgesic efficacy of intraperitoneal Ketamine compared with Bupivacain in Laparascopic Cholecystectomy. Anesthesiology and critical care. 2016; 2(1): 146-9.
19- Oza V, Parmar V, Badheka J, Nanavati D, Taur P. Comparative study of postoperative analgesic effect of intraperitoneal instillation of dexmedetomidine with bupivacaine and bupivacaine alone after laparoscopic surgery. J Minim Access Surg. 2016; 12 (3): 260-4.
20- Chiruvella S, Nallam S. Interaperitoneal insillation of ropivacain plus Dexmedetomidine for pain relief after laparoscopic hysterectomy. Journal of Dr, NTR university of health sciences. 2016; 5 (2):93-7.

Downloads

Published

2019-08-26

How to Cite

Kamali, A., Maktabi, M., Khademi, Z., & Fereidooni, T. (2019). Comparison of the effect of dexmedmotidine and ketamine on controlling pain after cesarean section via intra-peritoneal method: dexmedmotidine and ketamine on controlling pain after cesarean section. Journal of Contemporary Medical Sciences, 5(4), 224–226. https://doi.org/10.22317/jcms.v5i4.598