Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Nov;8(Suppl 1):S57-62.
doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.144078.

Effect of clonidine versus dexmedetomidine on pain control after laparoscopic gastric sleeve: A prospective, randomized, double-blinded study

Affiliations

Effect of clonidine versus dexmedetomidine on pain control after laparoscopic gastric sleeve: A prospective, randomized, double-blinded study

Zoher M Naja et al. Saudi J Anaesth. 2014 Nov.

Abstract

Background: The use of opioids in surgeries for morbidly obese patients could cause respiratory depression. Therefore, alternative analgesics are needed to improve anesthetic management for obese patients. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of dexmedetomidine and clonidine on pain as well as analgesic consumption at 24 h postoperatively in patients undergoing laparoscopic gastric sleeve. The secondary objective was to compare patients' and surgeons' satisfaction.

Materials and methods: A total of 60 obese and morbidly obese patients scheduled to undergo laparoscopic gastric sleeve were randomly assigned into two groups. 10 min after induction of general anesthesia, one group received 0.8-1.2 μg/kg/30 min intravenous (IV) clonidine through 500 mL lactated Ringer's solution and placebo (normal saline solution) through syringe pump. The second group received IV dexmedetomidine through syringe pump at a rate 0.5-0.8 μg/kg/h and placebo through 500 mL lactated Ringer's solution. Data on pain, analgesic consumption, and return to normal activity in addition to patients' and surgeons' satisfaction were collected.

Results: Both groups were similar with respect to demographic and intraoperative hemodynamic characteristics. Fentanyl consumption, surgery duration and hospital stay were similar for the two groups. Pain scores on walking were significantly lower in the clonidine group at 12 h postoperatively (P = 0.014) compared with dexmedetomidine group. The number of patients who consumed pethidine was significantly lower in the clonidine group at 12 h postoperatively (P = 0.045).

Conclusion: This study concluded that clonidine and dexmedetomidine yielded similar outcomes with a difference in pain and analgesic consumption at 12 h postoperatively.

Keywords: Analgesia; opioids; postoperative pain.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart illustrating the selection of patients
Figure 2
Figure 2
Average heart rate at different time intervals
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean arterial pressure at different time intervals

References

    1. Tufanogullari B, White PF, Peixoto MP, Kianpour D, Lacour T, Griffin J, et al. Dexmedetomidine infusion during laparoscopic bariatric surgery: The effect on recovery outcome variables. Anesth Analg. 2008;106:1741–8. - PubMed
    1. Oberg B, Poulsen TD. Obesity: An anaesthetic challenge. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1996;40:191–200. - PubMed
    1. Perilli V, Sollazzi L, Bozza P, Modesti C, Chierichini A, Tacchino RM, et al. The effects of the reverse trendelenburg position on respiratory mechanics and blood gases in morbidly obese patients during bariatric surgery. Anesth Analg. 2000;91:1520–5. - PubMed
    1. Feld JM, Hoffman WE, Stechert MM, Hoffman IW, Ananda RC. Fentanyl or dexmedetomidine combined with desflurane for bariatric surgery. J Clin Anesth. 2006;18:24–8. - PubMed
    1. Guignard B, Coste C, Costes H, Sessler DI, Lebrault C, Morris W, et al. Supplementing desflurane-remifentanil anesthesia with small-dose ketamine reduces perioperative opioid analgesic requirements. Anesth Analg. 2002;95:103–8. - PubMed