A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INTRAVENOUS DEXMEDETOMIDINE AND INTRAVENOUS CLONIDINE FOR PROLONGATION OF BUPIVACAINE SPINAL ANAESTHESIA

TJPRC: International Journal of General Surgery, Anesthesiology and Clinical Research (TJPRC: IJGSACR) Vol. 1 Issue 1, Dec 2017, 9-20 TJPRC Pvt. Ltd. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INTRAVENOUS DEXMEDETOMIDINE AND INTRAVENOUS CLONIDINE FOR PROLONGATION OF BUPIVACAINE SPINAL ANAESTHESIA SINDHU J, NIRMALA B.C., NARASIMHA REDDY B. & SOWMYA G Department of Anaesthesiology, M.V.J. Medical College & Research Hospital, Hosakote, Bangalore, India ABSTRACT Objectives To compare the effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine and intravenous clonidine with placebo on the duration of subarachnoid block, hemodynamic changes, sedation and duration of post-operative analgesia in patients undergoing elective lower limb surgeries under spinal anaesthesia with 0.5% of hyperbaric bupivacaine. Methods One hundred and fifty patients posted for lower limb surgeries were divided into three groups of 50 each. Group B received 10ml of physiological saline IV, Group C received 1microgram/kgbw of clonidine I.V. and Group D received 0.5microgram/kgbw of dexmedetomidine I.V. Following this, lumbar puncture was performed at L 3 -L 4 spinal interspace and hyperbaric, 0.5% bupivacaine 15 mg was injected intrathecally. Results The regression time of sensory block and motor were significantly longer in the dexmedetomidine and the clonidine groups than the placebogroup. Higher ratio of patients in Groups C and D required atropine for management for bradycardia. The Ramsay Sedation Scores were (1.48±0.30) in Group B, (2.16±0.45) in Group C and (2.59±0.61) in Group D. The time to VAS 3 was 3.90±0.71 hours in Group B, 5.06±0.65 hours in Group C and 5.52±0.89 hours in Group D. There were significant intergroup differences among the three groups with Group D having the best sedation and the longest duration of analgesia. Original Article Conclusions Intravenous dexmedetomidine and clonidine prolong the duration of anaesthesia and post-operative analgesia, but cause transient reversible bradycardia. The sedation and post-operative analgesia is better with dexmedetomidine when compared to clonidine. KEYWORDS: Intravenous Clonidine, Dexmedetomidine Adjuvant and Premedication Spinal Anaesthesia Received: May 09, 2017; Accepted: May 31, 2017; Published: Jun 09, 2017; Paper Id.: TJPRC:IJGSACRDEC20172 INTRODUCTION Regional anaesthesia has several advantages over general anaesthesia including spontaneous ventilation, retained upper airway reflexes, early post-operative ambulation and lower cost, to name a few. Hence it is the preferred mode of anaesthesia whenever feasible. Among the disadvantages are absence of anxiolysis and inadequacy in case of prolonged surgeries. Several drugs likeopioids,α 2 agonists, neostigmine, dexamethasone and magnesium sulphate, have been used as additives with local anaesthetics to eliminate anxiety or to prolong the duration of anaesthesia and post-operative analgesia.(1) Clonidine and dexmedetomidine are α 2 - adrenoreceptor

10 Sindhu J, Nirmala B.C., Narasimha Reddy B. & Sowmya G agonists used intrathecally, cause sympatholysis, analgesia and sedation by action on α 2 receptors in locus ceruleus and the substantia gelatinosa of the spinal cord.(2) Analgesic and sedative properties were found when these drugs were administered in the in trathecal, epidural or intravenous routes.(3), (4), (5)There are not many studies comparing the effects of the two commonly used α 2 adrenergic agonists given intravenously as premedication in subarachnoid block. Therefore, this study was designed to compare the efficacy and clinical profile of two α 2 adrenergic agonists- dexmedetomidine and clonidine with the control group. The study aims to compare the effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine and intravenous clonidine with placebo on the duration of subarachnoid block, hemodynamic changes, sedation, duration of post-operative analgesia and also side effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS After obtaining institutional ethical clearance a total150 ASA I and II patients scheduled for lower limb surgeries under spinal anaesthesia were chosen for the study. Pre-anesthetic check up was done one day prior to the surgery. The patients were evaluated for any systemic diseases and laboratory investigations recorded. The inclusion criteria were ASA physical status classes I and II, Patients weighing 50-70 kg, measuring 150-170 cm height, with body mass index (BMI) of 18-35 kg/m2 and age less than 60years of either sex. Exclusion criteria were history of allergy to the local anesthetic drug or to the study drugs, history of cardiac disease, hypertension, psychological disease, spinal deformities, contraindication to spinal anesthesia such as coagulation defects infection at the puncture site, pre-existing neurological deficits and hemodynamic instability. The procedure was explained to the patients. They were educated about the use of visual analogue scale. Preparation of patients included period of overnight fasting. Patients were pre-medicated with tab. ranitidine 150 mg and tab. alprazolam 0.5 mg H.S. Preparation of Operating Theatre The operating room was preapared. Anaesthesia machine was checked. Emergency drugs and equipment were kept ready. The patients were connected to electrocardiography, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO 2 ) and non-invasive blood pressure monitor. Baseline parameters were recorded. An IV line will be secured with 18 gauge cannula. Patients were preloaded with 10ml/kg body weight of Ringer lactate solution. The patients were randomly divided into three groups. Group B (n=50) received 10ml of physiological saline I.V. Group C (n=50) received 1microgram/kg of clonidine, I.V. and Group D (n=50) received 0.5microgram/kg of dexmedetomidine I.V., each constituted with distilled water to a total volume of 10 ml. The study drugs were administered intravenously over a period of 10 min as a single dose. Under strict asepsis, lumbar puncture was performed at L 3 -L 4 spinal interspace, in sitting position, through a standard midline approach using a 25-G Quincke spinal needle. Hyperbaric, bupivacaine (0.5%)15 mg was injected intrathecally. Intraoperatively heart rate, non-invasive blood pressure, SpO2 was recorded, every 5 minutes. Time of onset of T10 sensory block and peak sensory block was noted using sterile pin prick method, time of onset of bromage 3 motor block was noted. The motor block was assessed with Modified Bromage scale: coded 0 - the patient is able to move the hip, knee and ankle; coded 1 - the patient is unable to move the hip but is able to move the knee and ankle;coded2 - the patient is

A Comparative Study of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Intravenous 11 Clonidine for Prolongation of Bupivacaine Spinal Anaesthesia unable to move the hip and knee but able to move the ankle andcoded 3 - the patient is unable to move the hip, knee and ankle. Modified Ramsay sedation scale was used for intra-operative sedation: Coded 1- agitated, restless; Coded2- co-operative, tranquil;coded3-responds to verbal commands while sleeping;coded4- brisk response to glabellar tap or loud noise while sleeping;coded5 -sluggish response to glabellar tap or loud noise while sleeping and Coded6- no response to glabellar tap or loud noise while sleeping The vital data, heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), oxygen saturation (SpO 2), were recorded before premedication, after end of premedication, after dural puncture, every 05 min after spinal anesthesia during surgery and every 15 minutes postoperatively until a recovry from the block. The recovery time for the sensory blockade was defined as two-dermatome regression of anesthesia from the maximum level. Motor block duration was the time to return to grade-1 on the modified Bromage scale. Hypotension (defined by a decrease in MAP below 20% of baseline or systolic pressure <90 mmhg) were treated with incremental doses of ephedrine 6mg i.v., and additional lactated Ringer's solution as appropriate. Bradycardia (HR< 50 beats/min) were treated with Atropine 0.6 mg I.V. Incidence of respiratory depression defined as and SpO2 less than 90 % on room air, was noted. Pain was assessed using Visual Analogue Scale. It is linear scale, consisting of 10 cm line anchored at one end by a label such as No pain and other end by Worst pain imaginable. Patient simply marks the line to indicate the pain intensity. Patients with a VAS score of 3 or more will receive injection Diclofenac sodium 75-mg intramuscularly as rescue analgesia. Patients were followed up till they marked a Visual Analogue Score of 3. Supplemental analgesia was given for visual analogue score of more than 3. Time of supplemental analgesia (VAS3) was noted. Patients in whom the level of sensory block was less than T10 or motor block was less than Bromage 3 were not included in the study and general anesthesia was administered to them. Collected data was analysed by using SPSS-16.50 version. Univariate and multivariate analysis was employed to draw the significant inference. RESULTS The demographic profiles of the patients among the groups were comparable. The Mean ages in Group B, Group C and Group D are 35.10±14.09 Years, 35.44±11.82 Years and 33.50±10.13 years respectively with a P value of 0.0695, hence samples were age matched. The ratio of males and females are similar among the three groups with a P value of 0.597.Samples are gender matched. The anthropometric parameters like height, weight and BMI were also comparable. The P value comparing the distribution of ASA grade among the three groups is 0.369. ASA distribution among the three groups is comparable. Mean duration of surgery in Group B, Group C and Group D are 91.40±31.14, 94.20±33.42 and 99.80±31.00 minutes respectively. The duration of surgery is comparable among the three groups with a P value of 0.409. Table 1: Comparison of MAP (mm Hg) in Three Groups Studied MAP (mm Hg) Group B Group C Group D P Value 1. Pre-operative MAP 93.65±11.85 96.87±11.29 95.23±9.65 0.343 2. Following premedication 91.36±10.97 91.85±9.98 90.16±9.79 0.700 3. Following SAB 85.44±10.94 88.40±10.75 85.27±11.61 0.288 4. Intraoperative MAP 85.72±9.59 86.14±8.89 84.94±7.67 0.784 5. Post operative MAP 89.80±10.82 88.36±8.57 86.69±7.88 0.241 There is no significant difference in MAP among the three groups.

12 Sindhu J, Nirmala B.C., Narasimha Reddy B. & Sowmya G Table 2: Comparison of MAP (mm Hg) between Groups C&D Studied MAP (mm Hg) Group C Group D P value Pre-operative hemodynamic 96.87±11.29 95.23±9.65 0.437 Haemodynamic following premedication 91.85±9.98 90.16±9.79 0.396 Haemodynamic following SAB 88.40±10.75 85.27±11.61 0.165 Intraoperative hemodynamic 86.14±8.89 84.94±7.67 0.470 Post operative Haemodynamic 88.36±8.57 86.69±7.88 0.316 There is no significant difference in MAP between groups C & D Table 3: Comparison of Heart Rate (bpm) in Three Groups Studied Heart Rate (bpm) Group B Group C Group D P value 1.Pre-operative heart rate 80.46±10.88 76.48±10.87 77.06±12.23 0.170 2.Following premedication 80.00±9.23 74.04±11.79 71.24±11.68 <0.001** 3.Following SAB 79.30±10.89 73.28±11.57 71.06±11.15 0.001** 4.Intraoperative heart rate 75.25±9.48 67.96±6.86 68.28±7.92 <0.001** 5.Post operative heart rate 75.64±9.62 68.90±8.72 67.92±8.95 <0.001** Heart rate is significantly lower in the Clonidine and Dexmedetomidine groups with Pvalue of <0.001 Table 4: Comparison of Heart Rate (bpm) in Two Groups Studied Heart Rate (bpm) Group C Group D P value Pre-operative hemodynamic 76.48±10.87 77.06±12.23 0.603 Haemodynamic following premedication 74.04±11.79 71.24±11.68 0.236 Haemodynamic following SAB 73.28±11.57 71.06±11.15 0.331 Intraoperative hemodynamic 67.96±6.86 68.28±7.92 0.831 Post operative Haemodynamic 68.90±8.72 67.92±8.95 0.580 Heart rate is not significantly different between groups C and D Table 5: Comparison of Initial Block Characteristics in Three Groups Studied Group B Group C Group D P value Sensory blockonset time to T10(m) 3.64±1.08 3.48±1.05 3.30±1.27 0.330 Maximum sensory block (thoracic segment) 9.16±1.09 8.82±1.45 8.52±1.67 0.084+ Time to maximumsensory block(min) 4.16±1.22 4.26±1.12 4.44±1.11 0.469 Time to maximummotor block(min) 4.10±0.93 4.38±0.92 4.34±0.98 0.281 Table 6: Comparison of Ramsay Sedation Score in Three Groups Studied RSS Group B Group C Group D P value Pre-operative RSS 1.42±0.50 1.46±0.50 1.50±0.51 0.729 Intraoperative RSS 1.56±0.38 2.55±0.57 2.92±0.68 <0.001** Post operative RSS 1.48±0.30 2.16±0.45 2.59±0.61 <0.001** Graph 1: Comparison of Ramsay Sedation Score in Three Groups

A Comparative Study of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Intravenous 13 Clonidine for Prolongation of Bupivacaine Spinal Anaesthesia Table 7: Comparison of Ramsay Sedation Score in between Groups C& D RSS Group C Group D P value Pre-operative hemodynamic 1.46±0.50 1.50±0.51 0.693 Intraoperative hemodynamic 2.55±0.57 2.92±0.68 0.005** Post operative Haemodynamic 2.16±0.45 2.59±0.61 <0.001** Intraoperative and Postoperative mean sedation scores were shown significantly higher (p>0.01) in Groups C and D when compared to Group B(P<0.001). Intraoperative and Postoperative mean sedation scores is significantly higher (p>0.01) in Groups D when compared to Group C. Table 8: Post Operative Block Characteristics in Three Groups Studied Post Operative Block Characteristics Group B Group C Group D P Value Time to 2 segment regression (min) 117.90±13.89 128.10±22.2 141.70±24.30 <0.001** Time to bromage 1 158.70±25.37 166.20±29.82 186.60±24.27 <0.001** Time tovas 1(hr) 2.82±0.69 3.66±0.69 4.02±0.91 <0.001** Time tovas 3(hr) 3.90±0.71 5.06±0.65 5.52±0.89 <0.001** Graph 2: Comparison of Time to Bromage 1 Graph 3: Comparison of Time to VAS 3 Table 9: Post Operative Block Characteristics in between Groups C & D Studied Post Operative Block Characteristics Group C Group D P Value Time to 2 segment regression (min) 128.10±22.2 141.70±24.30 0.004** Time to bromage 1 166.20±29.82 186.60±24.27 <0.001** Time to VAS 1(hr) 3.66±0.69 4.02±0.91 0.028* Time to VAS 3(hr) 5.06±0.65 5.52±0.89 0.004**

14 Sindhu J, Nirmala B.C., Narasimha Reddy B. & Sowmya G The results revealed that, there was significant prolongation time (p<0.01) to regression of sensory and motor block in Groups C and D, when compared to Group B,. However, the rest of the groups were shown significant prolongation (p<0.01) in the time to first request of analgesia in Groups C and D (P<0.01) when compared to Group B. In addition to this there found to be significant prolongation time to regression of sensory and motor block in Groups D (P<0.01) when compared to Group C. where as prolongation in the time to first request of analgesia in Groups D (P <0.01) when compared to Group C were seen significantly differs. Side Effects Brady cardia for which Atropine(0.5mg) was given Ephedrine (6mg) for which hypotension was given Table 10: Comparison of Side Effects in Three Groups Studied Group B (N=50) Group C (N=50) Group D (N=50) No % No % No % P Value 1 2.0 13 26.0 12 24.0 <0.001** 10 20.0 19 38.0 23 46.0 0.06 + Side Effects Brady cardia for which Atropine(0.5mg) was given Ephedrine (6mg) for which hypotension was given Graph 4: Comparison of Incidence of bradycardia in Three Groups Table 11: Comparison of Side Effects in between Groups C & D Studied Group B (N=50) Group C (N=50) Group D (N=50) No % No % No % P Value 1 2.0 13 26.0 12 24.0 <0.001** 10 20.0 19 38.0 23 46.0 0.06 + Graph 5: Comparison of Incidence of Hypotension in Three Groups

A Comparative Study of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Intravenous 15 Clonidine for Prolongation of Bupivacaine Spinal Anaesthesia (Group B) (Group B) There is no significant difference in Groups C and D in incidence of hypotension when compared to Placebo There is significant difference in Groups C and D in the incidence of bradycardia when compared to Placebo There is no significant difference in hypotension between Groups C and D There is no significant difference in bradycardia between Groups C and D DISCUSSIONS Several adjuvants have been used to shorten the onset of block, prolong the duration of subarachnoid block and provide sedation. Dexmedetomidine and clonidine, have been used as adjuvants to local anesthetics by intrathecal, epidural, caudal, intravenous routes and for peripheral nerve blocks. Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective α2-adrenoreceptor agonist with α2:α1 binding ratio of 1620:1 compared to 220:1 for clonidine(2). The demographic profiles of the patients among the groups were comparable with regards to age, weight and body mass index. The pharmacokinetics of the local anaesthetic given intrathecally is different in the elderly when compared to that of young individuals. Hence, patients with age above 60 years have not been included in the study. Kim et al, in a dose response study showed that the required single dose of dexmedetomidine is 21% lower in the elderly(6).the mean duration of surgery was also comparable among the groups and the pre-operative vital parameters and sedation scores were also comparable. In a recent study Kim et al (6) found that the ED95 of a single-dose of dexmedetomidine to induce light sedation was 0.38 µg/kg. Also, it is noteworthy that a significant prolongation of anesthetic effect was observed with doses as low as 0.5 µg/kg29 administered as isolated boluses in the absence of maintenance infusion.(7).thus a dose of 0.5 µg/kg as premedication was selected in our study. Previous studies have elucidated a dose of clonidine, which is 1.5-2 times higher than the dose of dexmedetomidine.(8), (6) Based on the observations of previous studies a dose of 1.0µg/kg of clonidine was selected in our study. As rapid administration of dexmedetomidine might produce tachycardia, brady cardia and hypertension(9), (10) we administered the drugs over a period of 10 min in our study. Dexmedetomidine and clonidine have been used as adjuvants in various routes such as the oral(3),intravenous(5), (11), intrathecal(12), (13)and the epidural(4) routes. Niu et al(14) had observed that the use of dexmedetomidine including intravenous and intrathecal could statistically significantly prolong the duration of sensory and motor block and the time to first request for postoperative analgesia. Dobydnjov et al(3) had concluded that both intrathecal and oral clonidine significantly prolongedthe duration of spinal block. We infer from these studies that clonidine and dexmedetomidine prolonged the duration of spinal block and post-operative analgesia irrespective of the route of administration; hence we chose the intravenous route in this study. There was no significant difference in the mean onset time of sensory analgesia at T10 dermatome and onset of motor blockade between the groups. Similar results were seen in the study by Gupta et al.(15),where as some trials showed reduction in the time to onset of sensory analgesia with no difference in the onset of motor blockade.(16), (17), (5).The study by Kapdi et al(18) showed a significant increase in the onset of motor block with dexmedetomidine. The highest dermatomal level of sensory block was T9.16±1.09 in Group B, T8.82±1.45 in Group C and T8.52±1.67 in Group D with a P value of 0.084 which is only suggestive of significance. Similar results were seen in the trials by Gupta et al (P =0.07).Studies by Lugo et al also showed that dexmedetomidine and clonidine treated patients

16 Sindhu J, Nirmala B.C., Narasimha Reddy B. & Sowmya G always maintained higher sensory block, without significant differences, compared to placebo group(p<0.05).shah et al(19), who compared intravenous clonidine with placebo also found that there was no significant difference in the highest level of block between the two groups. Harsoor et al and Tekin et al also demonstrated no signififant difference in the highest level of sensory block in the three groups. The studies by F.N.Kaya et al(7) and Dinesh et al(20) showed a statistically significant difference with dexmedetomedine causing a higher level of sensory block when compared to placebo. In our study, two-segment regression time of sensory block and time to regression to bromage 1(motor block) were significantly prolonged in the dexmedetomidine group than clonidine and placebo groups (P<0.001).The two segment regression time was 117.90±13.89 minutes for Group B 128.10±22.2 minutes for Group C and141.70±24.30minutes for Group D. The time to return to Bromage 1 was 158.70±25.37 minutes for Group B 166.20±29.82 minutes for Group C and 186.60±24.27 minutes for Group D. The longer duration of block could be attributed to the mechanism of action of dexmedetomidine which differs from clonidine in being eight to ten times more selective to α2 - adrenoceptors especially for α2aand α2c subtype of this receptor. Similar results were observed by Harsoor et al(17), Al Mustafa et al(16), Tekin et al(21), Rhee et al(11), Kapdi et al(18).calasans et al.(22), Kubre et al (23) and Kad et al(24) investigated the duration of motor block in guinea pigs; they injected intrathecal levobupivacaine alone or with dexmedetomidine vs. injected intrathecal levobupivacaineplus intraperitoneal injection of dexmedetomidine and were able to prolong motor block duration in all animals. They also demonstrated that pretreatment with yohimbine reduced the duration of motor block. The time to first request for analgesia (Visual Analogue Score 3) was significantly longer (P<0.001) in Groups C and D when compared to the placebo (Group B).The time to VAS 3 was 3.90±0.71 hours in Group B, 5.06±0.65 hours in Group C and 5.52±0.89 hours in Group D. Also the time to first request for analgesia was significantly longer (P<0.004) in Group D when compared to the Group C.Similarly, both Reddy et al(8) and Lugo et al(5) have shown that dexmedetomidine provides a significantly longer duration of analgesia when compared to clonidine. The analgesic effects is mainly mediated by alpha 2 C and alpha 2 A receptors present on the neurons of superficial dorsal horn in lamina II, when activated, it inhibits the release of pro-nociceptive transmitters namely substance P and glutamate and hyperpolarize spinal inter-neurons inhabiting signal transmission.(25) The sedation produced by dexmedetomidine differs from other sedatives, as patients may be easily aroused and remain co-operative. In this study the mean intraoperative and postoperative sedation scores were significantly higher in Group B when compared to Groups C and D (P value <0.001).The Ramsay Sedation Scores: Group B(w1.48±0.30)<Group C(2.16±0.45)<Group D(2.59±0.61). The sedation scores were also significantly higher with exmedetomidine (Group D) when compared to clonidine (Group C) (P value <0.001).Similar results were observed by Reddy et al, Harsoor et al, Dinesh et al and F.N. Kaya et al. The sedative action of dexmedetomidine has been postulated as hyper-polarization in locus ceruleus neurons on the pons and lower brain stem (alpha 2A) resulting in inhibition of noradrenaline release and inhabiting activity in descending medullospinal noradrenergic pathways.(26)significantly higher proportion of patients in GroupC and Group D had bradycardia when compared to placebo Group B(27) Higher proportion of patients in Groups C and D required atropine for management for bradycardia (P<0.001).The number of patients who had a fall in systolic blood pressure more than 20% of baseline value was not significant. However use of higher doses or continuous infusions of the drugs did produce statistically significant hypotension.(28),(29).hence, ephedrine required to treat hypotension was comparable in the three groups (P=0.06).

A Comparative Study of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Intravenous 17 Clonidine for Prolongation of Bupivacaine Spinal Anaesthesia In the literature, the prevalence of bradycardia after spinal anesthesia was reported to be 10% to 15%. The prevalence of reduced HR following dexmedetomidine infusion was reported to be 25%.(30).This was consistent with the incidence of bradycardia (Group D -24%) in our study. Abdullah et al (31) conducted a meta-analysis and concluded that use of dexmedetomidine was associated with a 3.7-fold increase (P = 0.004) in transient reversible bradycardia requiring atropine. They also inferred that the incidence of bradycardia was higher in trials where the dexmedetomidine initial loading dose was infused over a shorter duration, such as 5 or 10 minutes, compared with those trials where the initial loading dose was administered over 20 minutes. All the 7 trials included in the analysis reported hypotension which was not significant (P=0.95).In a meta-analysis which included 8 trials, However the studies conducted by Reddy et al(8) and Lugo et al(5) showed no statistically significant difference in the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia among the three groups. Kolarkar et al(29) and Reddy et al(27) have reported a higher incidence of bradycardia with dexmedetomidine compared to placebo. Several studies(32), (33)also showed that there is a biphasic response with respect to the blood pressures, where there is a transient hypertension followed by hypotension (due to action on alpha 2B receptors. This biphasic response was not seen in our study. However Bloor et al showed that such a biphasic response is seen in patients who receive an initial loading dose of dexmedetomidine of 1µg/kg or more.(10) Dinesh et al(20) had inferred that total IV fluids administered in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly more compared to the control group though the incidence of hypotension was not significant. In our study, the total volume of intravenous fluids infused was not measured, this probably could explain the relatively low P value (0.06) in the incidence of hypotension. This study also showed that there is no statistically significant difference in the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia between Group C and Group D. These hemodynamic changes are due to decrease in central sympathetic outflow. Most of the studies(21), (34), (7), (31) report minimal to no respiratory depression following dexmedetomidine administration, which has also been validated by the results of our study. Hong et al(35) who studied the effect of low dose dexmedetomidine in elderly patients demonstrated that there was desaturation in this age group. CONCLUSIONS The present study concludes that, the premedication with intravenous dexmedeto midine or clonidine significantly prolongs of the duration of sensory and motor block, provides intra-operative sedation and post-operative analgesia. Both dexmedetomidine and clonidine cause hypotension and significant bradycardia which are transient and easily treatable. Dexmedetomidine provide a longer duration of sensory block, motor block and sedation and post-operative analgesia than clonidine without further increasing the incidence of adverse effects. REFERENCES 1. CHRISTIANSSON L. Update on adjuvants in regional anaesthesia. Period Biol. 2009;111(2):161 70. 2. Grewal A. Dexmedetomidine: New avenues. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2011;27(3):297 302. 3. Dobrydnjov I, Samarütel J. Enhancement of intrathecal lidocaine by addition of local and systemic clonidine. Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 1999. 4. Bajwa SJS, Bajwa SK, Kaur J, Singh G, Arora V, Gupta S, et al. Dexmedetomidine and clonidine in epidural anaesthesia: A comparative evaluation. Indian J Anaesth. 2011;55(2):116 21. 5. Whizar-lugo V, Gómez-ramírez IA, Cisneros-corral R, Martínez-gallegos N, Médico C, Tijuana BC, et al. Intravenous Dexmedetomidine vs. Intravenous Clonidine to prolong Bupivacaine Spinal Anesthesia. A Double Blind Study. 19(3):143 6.

18 Sindhu J, Nirmala B.C., Narasimha Reddy B. & Sowmya G 6. Kim J, Kim WO, Kim H, Kil HK. Adequate sedation with single-dose dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate with spinal anaesthesia : a dose response study by age group. 2015;15(1):1 7. 7. Kaya FN, Yavascaoglu B, Turker G, Yildirim A, Gurbet A, Mogol EB, et al. Intravenous dexmedetomidine, but not midazolam, prolongs bupivacaine spinal anesthesia. Can J Anesth. 2010;57(1):39 45. 8. Reddy VS, Shaik NA, Donthu B, Reddy Sannala VK, Jangam V. Intravenous dexmedetomidine versus clonidine for prolongation of bupivacaine spinal anesthesia and analgesia: A randomized double-blind study. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol [Internet]. Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd.; 2013 Jan 1 [cited 2013 Oct 13];29(3):342 7. Available from: http://www.joacp.org/article.asp?issn=0970-9185;year=2013;volume=29;issue=3;spage=342;epage=347;aulast=reddy 9. S.A G. dexmedetomidine infusion for sedation during fibreoptic intubation:a report of three cases. J Clin Anaesth. 2004;16:124 6. 10. Bloor BC, Ward DS, Belleville JP, Maze M. Effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine in humans. II. Hemodynamic changes. Anesthesiology. 1992. 11. Rhee K, Kang K, Kim J, Jeon Y. Intravenous clonidine prolongs bupivacaine spinal anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand [Internet]. 2003 Sep [cited 2013 Oct 24];47(8):1001 5. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.00158.x 12. Kanazi GE, Aouad MT, Jabbour-Khoury SI, Al Jazzar MD, Alameddine MM, Al-Yaman R, et al. Effect of low-dose dexmedetomidine or clonidine on the characteristics of bupivacaine spinal block. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand [Internet]. Blackwell Publishing Ltd/Inc.; 2006 Feb 1 [cited 2013 Oct 24];50(2):222 7. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1399-6576.2006.00919.x/full 13. Cao JP, Miao XY, Liu J, Shi XY. An evaluation of intrathecal bupivacaine combined with intrathecal or intravenous clonidine in children undergoing orthopedic surgery: A randomized double-blinded study. Paediatr Anaesth. 2011;21(4):399 405. 14. Niu XY, Ding XB, Guo T, Chen MH, Fu SK, Li Q. Effects of intravenous and intrathecal dexmedetomidine in spinal anesthesia: A meta-analysis. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2013;19(11):897 904. 15. Gupta K, Tiwari V, Gupta PK, Pandey MN, Agarwal S. Prolongation of subarachnoid block by intravenous dexmedetomidine for sub umbilical surgical procedures : A prospective control study. Anesth Essays Res. 2014;8(2):175 8. 16. Al-Mustafa MM, Badran IZ, Abu-Ali HM, Al-Barazangi B a, Massad IM, Al-Ghanem SM. Intravenous dexmedetomidine prolongs bupivacaine spinal analgesia. Middle East J Anesthesiol. 2009;20(2):225 31. 17. Harsoor S, Rani DD, Yalamuru B, Sudheesh K, Nethra S. Effect of supplementation of low dose intravenous dexmedetomidine on characteristics of spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine. Indian J Anaesth [Internet]. Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd.; 2013 May 1 [cited 2013 Oct 24];57(3):265 9. Available from: http://www.ijaweb.org/article.asp?issn=0019-5049;year=2013;volume=57;issue=3;spage=265;epage=269;aulast=harsoor 18. KAPDI MANISHA, SHAH SHRUTHI, THAKKAR MANISHA, PATELANKITHA, JOSHIPARA DHVANI SP. Intravenous Dexmedetomidine Prolongs Motor and Sensory Effect of Spinal Anaesthesia Medical Science. Int J Sci Res. 2014;3(7):336 8. 19. Shah PN, Pawar D. Use of Intravenous Clonidine for Prolonging Spinal Anaestheia. Glob J Medcal Res. 2014;14(1):1 6. 20. Dinesh CN, Mohan CVR. Effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine on hyperbaric bupivacaine spinal anesthesia : A randomized study. Saudi J Anaest. 2014;8(2):202 9.

A Comparative Study of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Intravenous 19 Clonidine for Prolongation of Bupivacaine Spinal Anaesthesia 21. Tekin M, Kati I, Tomak Y, Kisli E. Effect of Dexmedetomidine IV on the Duration of Spinal Anesthesia with Prilocaine: A Double-Blind, Prospective Study in Adult Surgical Patients. Curr Ther Res - Clin Exp. 2007;68(5):313 24. 22. Calasans-Maia JA, Zapata-Sudo G, Sudo RT. Dexmedetomidine prolongs spinal anaesthesia induced by levobupivacaine 0.5% in guinea-pigs. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2005;57(11):1415 20. 23. Kubre J, Sethi A, Mahobia M, Bindal D, Narang N, Saxena A. Single dose intravenous dexmedetomidine prolongs spinal anesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine. 2016;1(2):273 7. 24. Kad N, Dhoundiyal D, Ahlawat M, Ghai A, Kumar V. To Study the Effects of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine on Characteristics of Subarachnoid Block Using Hyperbaric Bupivacaine in Lower Limb Orthopaedic Surgery. 2016;2(5):3 6. 25. Ishii H, Kohno T, Yamakura T, Ikoma M, Baba H. Action of dexmedetomidine on the substantia gelatinosa neurons of the rat spinal cord. Eur J Neurosci. 2008;27(12):3182 90. 26. Guo TZ, Jiang JY, Buttermann AE MM. Dexmedetomidine injection into the locus ceruleus produces antinociception. 84: 873-881. Anesthesiology. 1996;84:873 81. 27. Reddy M, Narayanappa AB, Babu S. Original Article Effects of single bolus dose of intravenous Dexmedetomidine on intrathecal hyperbaric Bupivacaine : a randomized double blind placebo controlled trial. 2016;3(1):8 12. 28. Agrawal A, Agrawal S, Payal YS. Comparison of block characteristics of intravenous dexmedetomidine and clonidine spinal anesthesia following Introduction. 2016;1(3):339 43. 29. Kolarkar P, Badwaik G, Kalbande J, Watve A, Bhalerao A, Giri A. Does Intravenous Low Dose Dexmedetomidine Supplementation has Beneficial Effects on Spinal Anaesthesia? 2016;3(6):1547 50. 30. Elcicek, Kamauran, Tekin Murat KI. The effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine on spinal hyperbaric ropivacaine anesthesia. J Anaesth. 2010;24(8):544 8. 31. Abdallah FW, Abrishami A, Brull R. The facilitatory effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine on the duration of spinal anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesthesia and Analgesia. 2013. p. 271 8. 32. Mason KP, Zurakowski D, Zgleszewski S PR, Fontaine PJ DJ. Incidence and predictors of hypertension during high dose dexmedetomidine sedation for pediatric MRI. Paediatr Anaesth. 2010;20:516 23. 33. Grant SA, Breslin DS, MacLeod DB, Gleason D, Martin G. Dexmedetomidine infusion for sedation during fiberoptic intubation: A report of three cases. J Clin Anesth. 2004;16(2):124 6. 34. Al-Mustafa MM, Badran IZ, Abu-Ali HM, Al-Barazangi B a, Massad IM, Al-Ghanem SM. Intravenous dexmedetomidine prolongs bupivacaine spinal analgesia. Middle East J Anesthesiol. 2009;20(2):225 31. 35. Hong JY, Kim WO, Yoon Y, Choi Y, Kim SH, Kil HK. Effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine on low-dose bupivacaine spinal anaesthesia in elderly patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012;56(3):382 7.