European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine

Abstract

Background: Most urologic surgeries are performed in a narrow, limited space with
minimally invasive technique or cystoscope& anaesthesia for these procedures is
administered with the goals of safety, satisfactory procedural condition for the performance
of therapeutic or diagnostic procedures ensuring rapid recovery with minimal post-operative
complications. Therefore, we decided to compare the efficacy & safety of IV Propofol @1.5
mg/kg +Dexmedetomidine @1μg/kg versus IV Ketamine @ 1mg/kg + Dexmedetomidine @
1μg/kg in providing procedural sedation in urological procedures.
Material & Methods: This prospective randomized study was conducted in Department of
Anaesthesiology of Mamata medical hospital. In this study 50 patients scheduled for elective
daycare urological procedures were included and divided equally in two groups. Group Areceived
IV Propofol 1.5 mg/kg, then infusion of Dexmedetomidine@ 1μg/kgand group Breceived
IV Ketamine 1mg/kg, then Dexmedetomidine@ 1μg/kg.
Results: In our study, there is no significant difference in age, weight, gender. The
comparison of mean between two groups after giving dexmedetomidine was statistically
significant (p< 0.05) in heart rate, SBP, onset, duration of analgesia, VAS & Ramsay scores
but DBP & SpO2 was statistically not significant.
Conclusion: Comparison of baseline & intraoperative hemodynamics, showed that the values
were better maintained in Dexmedetomidine + propofol (Group-A) than Dexmedetomidine +
Ketamine (Group B). We have concluded that Dexmedetomidine + Propofol combination was
superior to Dexmedetomidine + Ketamine, providing early onset of sedation, prolonged
analgesia & stable intraoperative hemodynamics.