A randomized comparison between interscalene block and dexmedetomidine for arthroscopic shoulder surgery

Abstract

Introduction: Management of intraoperative hemodynamics and postoperative analgesia during arthroscopic shoulder surgeries remains a challenge. Although interscalene brachial plexus block (ISB) is considered ideal for shoulder anesthesia it requires skill and proficiency unlike intravenous (IV) dexmedetomidine.

Objective: This randomized trial was performed to observe the efficacy of dexmedetomidine infusion which is less invasive and demands lesser skills than plexus block.

Methodology: All patients scheduled for elective arthroscopic shoulder surgery under general anesthesia were assigned either to group DEX, which received an IV dexmedetomidine bolus of 0.5 mcg/kg over 20 minutes, followed by an infusion of 0.5 mcg/kg/hour that was stopped 30 minutes before surgery the end of surgery or to group BLOCK which received ultrasound guided ISB with 20ml of 0.25% bupivacaine. The primary outcome assessed was intraoperative hemodynamics; the secondary outcomes were immediate postoperative pain, operating condition as assessed by the surgeon, recovery time, and patient satisfaction after 24 hours. Blinded investigator and composite scores were used for the assessment.

Results: Both groups displayed equivalent scores for intraoperative hemodynamics whereas ISB resulted in a better post-operative analgesia (p < 0.001). Surgeon’s opinion and recovery time were comparable. Overall, the patients had a satisfactory experience with both techniques, according to the quality assessment.

Conclusion: IV dexmedetomidine infusion is an effective alternative to ISB for reconstructive shoulder surgeries under general anesthesia.