COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF INTRAVENOUS DEXMEDETOMIDINE AND MAGNESIUM SULFATE FOR ATTENUATION OF PRESSOR RESPONSE DURING LARYNGOSCOPY AND ENDOTRACHEAL INTUBATION: A RANDOMIZED CONTROL STUDY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2025v18i8.54982Keywords:
Dexmedetomidine,, Magnesium sulfate, Laryngoscopy, Pressor response.Abstract
Objectives: The present study compared the efficacy of intravenous dexmedetomidine versus intravenous magnesium sulfate for attenuation of pressor response during laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation.
Methods: This prospective randomized study was conducted among 52 patients undergoing general anesthesia. Patients were divided into two groups – Group D and Group M of 26 patients each. Group D received Inj. Dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg intravenous (IV) and Group M received Inj. Magnesium sulfate 30 mg/kg IV. diluted in 100 mL normal saline over 30 min before induction of general anesthesia. Hemodynamic parameters such as heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure were compared between both the groups till 7 min after intubation.
Results: Demographic parameters did not differ significantly between the groups (p>0.05). Group D showed significantly lower HR and blood pressure after induction, at intubation and at 1, 3, 5, and 7 min post-intubation compared to Group M (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Our study concluded that administering dexmedetomidine intravenously at a dose of 1 mcg/kg effectively reduced the sympathetic response to laryngoscopy and intubation as compared to magnesium sulfate 30 mg/kg intravenously.
Downloads
References
1. Hassan HG, El-Sharkawy TY, Renck H, Mansour G, Fouda A. Hemodynamic and catecholamine responses to laryngoscopy with vs. Without endotracheal intubation. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1991;35(5):442-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1991.tb03325.x, PMID 1887747
2. Randell T. Haemodynamic responses to intubation: What more do we have to know? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2004;48(4):393-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2004.00381.x, PMID 15025596
3. Velickovic I, Yan J, Grass JA. Modifying the neuroendocrine stress response. Semin Anaesth Perioper Med Pain. 2002;21(1):16-25. doi: 10.1053/sane.2002.29766
4. Dubé L, Granry JC. The therapeutic use of magnesium in anesthesiology, intensive care and emergency medicine: A review. Can J Anaesth. 2003;50(7):732-46. doi: 10.1007/BF03018719, PMID 12944451
5. Montazeri K, Falah M. Dose-response study: MgSO4 in cardiovascular responses after laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. Can J Anesth. 2005;52:80. doi: 10.1007/BF03018583
6. Kumar N, Khandelwal V, Nithish V. Comparison of intravenous clonidine and tramadol for post spinal anaesthesia shivering: A randomized study. Int J Curr Pharm Res. 2025;17(2):19-21. doi: 10.22159/ijcpr.2025v17i2.6042
7. Zia A, Kumar S, Sheikh U, Badada V, Sharma P. Dexmedetomidine and tramadol for management of post-spinal anesthesia shivering: A comparative study. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2023;16(9):183-7. doi: 10.22159/ajpcr.2023v16i10.49364
8. Choudhary N, Singh R, Sharma A, Gupta M. Comparison of infusion dexmedetomidine with magnesium sulfate for attenuation of the hemodynamic response during endotracheal intubation. Int J Acad Med Pharm. 2023;5(2):1505-12. doi: 10.47009/jamp.2023.5.2.301
9. Ahmad S, Gupta R, Badada V, Gupta Y. Compare the efficacy of intravenous magnesium sulphate and dexmedetomidine in reducing the hemodynamic stress response during laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. Int J Pharm Clin Res. 2023;15(4):1-13. doi: 10.25258/ijpcr. v15i4.2489
10. Alsadik HM, El-Wakeel SA, Elsayed KM, Kamel AA. A comparison between magnesium sulphate and two doses of dexmedetomidine to attenuate the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation. Med J. 2023;29(4):975-982. doi: 10.21608/zumj.2023.203456.2756
11. Mahajan L, Kaur M, Gupta R, Aujla KS, Singh A, Kaur A. Attenuation of the pressor responses to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation with intravenous dexmedetomidine versus magnesium sulphate under bispectral index-controlled anaesthesia: A placebo-controlled prospective randomised trial. Indian J Anaesth. 2018;62(5):337-43. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA-1-18, PMID 29910490
12. Karan D, Swaro S, Banerjee S. Comparison of fentanyl and dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to bupivacaine in supraclavicular brachial plexus block: A randomized-double blind prospective study. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2016;9(5):74-7. doi: 10.22159/ajpcr.2016. v9i5.11928
13. Sebastian B, Talikoti AT, Krishnamurthy D. Attenuation of haemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation with intravenous dexmedetomidine: A comparison between two doses. Indian J Anaesth. 2017;61(1):48-54. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.198404, PMID 28216704
14. Thapa C, Gauchan S. A comparative study between two different doses of dexmedetomidine for attenuation of hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation. Nepal Med Coll J. 2019;21(3):178-83. doi: 10.3126/nmcj.v21i3.26444
15. Chattopadhyay S, Datta M, Biswas B. Perioperative effects of intrathecal clonidine and fentanyl with hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia for vaginal hysterectomy. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2016;9(5):245-8. doi: 10.22159/ajpcr.2016.v9i5.13382
16. Zhang L, Wang H, Chen M, Liu S. Nebulized dexmedetomidine for hemodynamic stability during intubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Anesthesiol. 2023;23:406. doi: 10.1186/s12871- 023-02366-9
17. Scheinin H, Virtanen R, MacDonald E, Lammintausta R, Scheinin M. Medetomidine--a novel alpha 2-adrenoceptor agonist: A review of its pharmacodynamic effects. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 1989;13(5):635-51. doi: 10.1016/0278-5846(89)90051-1, PMID 2571177
18. El-Wakeel S, Elsayed K, Kamel A, Alsadik H. A comparison between magnesium sulphate and two doses of dexmedetomidine to attenuate the hemodynamic response to laryngeoscopy and tracheal intubation. Med J. 2023;10(6):2104-87. doi: 10.21608/zumj.2023.204567.2789
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2025 Sujay Ghetiya

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The publication is licensed under CC By and is open access. Copyright is with author and allowed to retain publishing rights without restrictions.