title: Comparative study between the effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol on cerebral oxygenation during sedation at pediatric cardiac catheterization.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Nowadays, assessment of brain oxygen saturation, which is simply appliable and noninvasive method, can provide the anesthesia plans to be optimized according to the needs of the brain, which is the main target organ. Brain may be exposed to hypoxia due to supply-demand imbalance of oxygen not only in general anesthesia procedures but also in sedation practices. The aim of the study is to compare the effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol which are widely used agents for pediatric catheterization procedures on brain oxygen saturation using Fore-Sight.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 44 patients undergoing diagnostic cardiac catheterization between 1 and 18 years old were included in the study. All patients, who were randomly divided into two groups, had ASA physical status I-II. In Group Propofol (Group P, n = 22),induction of sedation was made by midazolam (0.5 mg,iv) + propofol (1m/kg,iv), and in Group Dexmedetomidine (Group D, n = 22), induction of sedation was made by midazolam (0.5 mg,iv) +dexmedetomidine (1mcg/kg, iv). Throughout the sedation, cerebral tissue oxygen saturation (SctO 2 ) was recorded by Fore-Sight in addition to routine monitoring.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of demographic data, hemodynamic data and sedation scores. On other hand, statistically significant decreases in cerebral tissue oxygen saturation were detected especially at 5th and 10th minutes, in Group D, while cerebral oxygenation level did not decrease in Group P. Though, statistically significant difference was determined between two groups in terms of cerebral oxygen saturation, the obtained data was not interpreted as cerebral desaturation.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  As a conclusion, there was a statistically significant but clinically insignificant decrease in cerebral tissue oxygen saturation in dexmedetomidine group compared to propofol group. Although it does not seem to be important in hemodynamic stabilization, we assume that may cause problems for clinically unstable patients.
authors.forename: Murat
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Cetin
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey.
authors.forename: Handan
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Birbicer
authors.forename: Olgu
authors.initials: O
authors.lastname: Hallioglu
authors.forename: Gulhan
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Orekeci
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D062186:Arterial Pressure / Q000187:drug effects; D001923:Brain Chemistry; D006328:Cardiac Catheterization / Q000379:methods*; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D016292:Procedural Sedation / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D017023:Coronary Angiography / Q000379:methods; D020927:Dexmedetomidine / Q000009:adverse effects; D005260:Female; D006331:Heart Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis; D006801:Humans; D006993:Hypnotics and Sedatives / Q000009:adverse effects; D007223:Infant; D008297:Male; D008874:Midazolam; D010101:Oxygen Consumption; D015742:Propofol / Q000009:adverse effects; D011446:Prospective Studies
chemical_list: D006993:Hypnotics and Sedatives; D020927:Dexmedetomidine; D008874:Midazolam; D015742:Propofol