Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 123 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Search | Current Issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Copyright form | Subscribe | Advertise | Contacts
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 14  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 578-583

Premedication for induced hypotension in functional endoscopic sinus surgeries: Intravenous dexmedetomidine infusion vs oral metoprolol vs placebo: A comparative study

Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, SGRD Medical College and Hospital, Amritsar, Punjab, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Lakshmi Mahajan
Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, SGRD Medical College and Hospital, Amritsar, Punjab
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/aer.AER_19_21

Rights and Permissions

Background: Controlled hypotension has been used to reduce bleeding and the need for blood transfusions and provide a satisfactory bloodless surgical field. In this double-blind, randomized controlled trial, we are comparing intravenous (i.v.) dexmedetomidine infusion and oral metoprolol as a premedication for controlled hypotension in functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) for evaluating surgical field visibility. Subjects and Methods: A total of 90 patients undergoing FESS were randomly divided into three groups of 30 each. Group A received intraoperative i.v. infusion of dexmedetomidine (loading 1 μ−1 over 10 min followed by the maintenance of 0.2–0.5 μ−1.h−1), Group B received oral metoprolol 50 mg on night and 2 h before surgery as a premedication, and Group C was taken as a control group and patients received oral placebo tablet as premedication and intraoperative normal saline infusion. General anesthesia was given using sevoflurane. Intraoperative target mean arterial blood pressure was set 55–65 mmHg. Various parameters were recorded and statistically compared. Results: The three groups were statistically comparable in demographics. Quality of surgical field was better in Group A compared to other two groups. Total blood loss was also less in Group A. The incidence of adverse reactions was more in Group A. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine provides a better surgical field compared to oral metoprolol in FESS along with the desired hemodynamics with lesser blood loss and better outcome.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded21    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal