Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 36831

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"

Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018

Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."

Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018

Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."

Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
On Sep 2018

Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."

Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata

Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".

Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".

Dr. Mamta Gupta
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018

Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.

Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."

Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
On May 11,2011

Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."

Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
On April 2011

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.

Dr. Anuradha
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : June | Volume : 16 | Issue : 6 | Page : UC20 - UC24 Full Version

Anaesthetic and Haemodynamic Effects of Dexmedetomidine vs Midazolam used as Premedication in Minor Obstetrics and Gynaecological Procedures- A Prospective Interventional Study

Published: June 1, 2022 | DOI:
Anita Manoj Kulkarni, Shilpayogesh Gurav, Leena Shibupaulose

1. Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesia, MIMER Medical College, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune, Maharashtra, India. 2. Professor and Head, Department of Anaesthesia, MIMER Medical College, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune, Maharashtra, India. 3. Associate Professor, Department of Anaesthesia, MIMER Medical College, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune, Maharashtra, India.

Correspondence Address :
Anita Manoj Kulkarni,
J 201,Queen's Town,Oposite Chinchwad Railway Station, Udyog Nagar
Chinchwad, Pune, Chinchwad, Maharashtra, India.


Introduction: Preoperative anxiety for any surgery is a frequent condition. It may lead to high catecholamine levels which increases blood pressure, heart rate and oxygen consumption. Various agents have been used for anxiolysis and sedation as premedicants.

Aim: To compare the anaesthetic and haemodynamic effects of injection Dexmedetomidine and injection Midazolam used as premedication in minor Obstetrics and Gynaecological procedures.

Materials and Methods: This was a prospective interventional study conducted from July 2016 to September 2017, on total number of 60 patients of American Society of Anaesthesiologist Physical Status (ASA PS I and II) enrolled for the study. They were randomised in two groups: Group A (n=30) for Injection (Inj.) Midazolam 0.04 mg/kg and Group B (n=30) for injection Dexmedetomidine 1mcg /kg injected over a period of 10 minutes prior to General Anaesthesia. After appropriate monitoring like, Heart Rate (HR), Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP), Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP), Mean arterial Pressure (MAP), Peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), Respiratory Rate (RR) were noted during the procedure at interval of 5 minutes till 30 minutes and, Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in postoperative period for 1 hour at interval of 15 minutes. The significance between all variables and amongst the two groups was calculated by Chi-square test, Repeated measure Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test and Independent sample t test.

Results: It was observed that mean HR, SBP (p<0.05), DBP (p<0.05) and MAP (p<0.05 ) decreased significantly in group B. The RR (p<0.05) was significantly decreased in group B. There was no significant difference in SpO2 (p=0.4) value in both the groups. VAS (p<0.05) of group B patients was significantly reduced in the postoperative period but there was no significant difference in RSS score (p=0.1) at 45 and 60 minutes in both the groups.

Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine is more effective as a sedative agent than injection Midazolam when used in minor gynaecological procedures. Though Dexmedetomidine caused significant reduction in SBP, DBP and HR, it maintained haemodynamic stability well without causing any adverse effects.


Analogue, Anaesthesia, Postoperative, Ramsay, Sedation, Visual analog scale

Prompt and street fit recovery after a day care surgery has become necessity in modern anaesthesia practice. Preoperative anxiety is a frequent medical condition. Generally it starts two days before the operation and reaches its peak just prior to the induction of anaesthesia (1). Anxiety is more common among younger patients and females. Anxiety, stress and fear that arise just before the operation, may lead to psychological trauma and increase the release of stress hormones resulting in undesirable metabolic responses before anaesthesia (1),(2),(3). High catecholamine levels in blood increase arterial blood pressure, heart rate and oxygen consumption. Comfortable anaesthesia induction and maintenance can be achieved by controlling preoperative anxiety. Various agents such as Phenothiazines, Benzodiazepines, Barbiturates, and Opioids and Antihistamines have traditionally been used to relieve anxiety and provide sedation. Today the most frequently used drugs are Benzodiazepines (4). Midazolam is the medication from this group with rapid onset and short lasting effect. Its sedative effect has been shown in many studies (5),(6),(7).

It has been evident that alpha 2 adrenoceptor agonist may also work in conjunction with anaesthesia (8),(9). Dexmedetomidine is an imidazole derivative. It has sedative, analgesic, sympatholytic and anxiolytic effect that blunt many of the cardiovascular responses in the perioperative period. Dexmedetomidine exerts a sympatholytic effect by activating inhibitory alpha 2 receptors, both in the Central Nervous System (CNS) and peripheral sympathetic nerve endings (9),(10),(11),(12).

Number of minor obstetrics and gynaecological procedures are performed as day care procedures. The objectives of the present study were-

a. To compare the anaesthetic and haemodynamic properties of inj. Dexmedetomidine and inj. Midazolam used as a premedication in minor obstetrics and gynaecological procedures.
b. To observe any side effects of these drugs.

Material and Methods

The present study was a prospective interventional study, conducted from July 2016 to September 2017, on 60 patients who came to Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, MIMER Medical College, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune, India, after obtaining approval of the Institutional Ethical Committee (IEC/157). A written informed consent was obtained from all participants after informing about the procedure.

Inclusion criteria: Those patients aged 18 to 60 years of American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status (ASA PS) grade I and II (13), admitted in Gynaecology Department, planned to undergo a minor obstetrics and gynaecological procedures like Dialatation and Currettage, Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP), copper T-insertion etc. under general anaesthesia were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: Those patients on alpha and beta blockers as antihypertensive, hypertensive patients without any medication (uncontrolled hypertension), patients with psychiatric illness and those on concurrent sedative medications were excluded from the study.

Sample size calculation: With pilot study of 20 patients done earlier and considering power >80%, confidence interval of 95% and alpha error of 5%, the appropriate sample of the present study was calculated to 60 patients.

Hence, a total of 60 patients satisfying the inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled in the study and were divided into group A (n=30) and group B (n=30) according to the treatment planned as depicted in the flow diagram (Table/Fig 1).


The patients were randomly allocated in two groups, group A (n=30) Midazolam group and group B (n=30) Dexmedetomidine group. The group A received Inj. Midazolam 0.4 mg/kg in 100 mL normal saline and group B received inj. Dexmedetomidine, 1 microgram/kg in 100 mL normal saline over the period of 10 minutes. These agents used for premedication were administered by slow intravenous (i.v.) infusion to provide better haemodynamic control and stop them if needed in case of complication.

The patients were transferred to the preoperative room 40 minutes prior to anaesthesia induction. Peripheral venous routes were accessed via 20-G catheters and infusion of ringer lactate solution was started. They were reminded about the procedure and about how to mark the VAS (14). Non invasive blood pressure measurement, electrocardiography and peripheral oxygen saturation monitoring was performed. The infusions of the medications were given before induction and completed within 10 minutes. Both groups received injection Fentanyl citrate 1microgram/kg and injection Glycopyrrolate 0.02 mg/kg before induction. Anaesthesia was induced with injection Propofol 2 mg/kg and maintained with Nitrous oxide/Oxygen (70%:30%) by face mask and with top up doses of injection Propofol.

Onset time of sedative infusion was taken as minute 0 and the following parameters were measured at the interval of five minutes. The HR, SBP, DBP, MAP, RR and SpO2 were recorded. After the procedure and recovery from anaesthesia, the patients were observed for one hour. The anxiety threshold was assessed with the VAS, preoperatively as well as postoperatively at 15 minutes interval.

The patients were asked to self evaluate their feelings of anxiety with the scores of 0 to 10 with (0=absent and 10=worst). The level of sedation was assessed by using RSS (15), preoperatively as well as postoperatively at 15 minutes interval, RSS, 1=agitated, restless, 2=cooperative, tranquil, 3=responds to verbal commands while sleeping 4=brisk response to glabellar tap or loud voice while sleeping, 5=sluggish response to glabellar tap or loud voice, 6= no response to glabellar tap or loud voice). Drug related side effects like bradycardia (HR<50 beats /minute), hypotension (MAP<60mm of Hg), nausea, vomiting were recorded and treated accordingly.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed by using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 21.0. Comparison of qualitative data was performed with Chi-square test and expressed in terms of median, frequency and percentage. The statistical analysis of the changes in pulse, mean arterial pressure, SBP, DBP, RR and SpO2 were performed with Repeated measure ANOVA test. Statistical analysis of the VAS and Ramsay score was done over two period of time, from start of study till the time of induction and from recovery till the patient is shifted to the wards, with independent sample t test. Mean and standard deviation were calculated for quantitative variables. Analysis of variance test was used to compare the parameters with normal distribution between the groups. The p-value <0.05 was considered to be significant.


Total of 60 patients aged 18-60 years were enrolled in the present study. Mean age of 30 patients included in group A was 28.5 years while those of 30 patients in group B was 29.1 years. The demographic data of both the groups was comparable (Table/Fig 2).

Mean HR measured, analysed and compared for all study subjects amongst the two groups are tabulated (Table/Fig 3). It was observed that mean HR differed significantly between Group A and Group B at all time intervals. There was significant reduction in the HR in group B as compared to group A. Further analysis showed that there was significant difference within group A and (p-value=0.01). Mean SBP differed significantly between group A and group B 15 min onwards intra-operatively and at 15 min postoperatively. There was significant reduction in the systolic blood pressure in group B as compared to group A (Table/Fig 3).

The mean DBP differed significantly between Group A and Group B from 15 min onwards intra-operatively, and at all points of time postoperatively. There was significant reduction in the diastolic blood pressure in group B as compared to group A (Table/Fig 3). Mean MAP differed significantly between Group A and Group B from 15 min onwards intra-operatively and all time points postoperatively. There was significant reduction in the MAP in group B as compared to group A (Table/Fig 3).

Mean RR reduced significantly in Group B as compared to Group A at 5 min, 10min, 15 min and 30 min during the operation and at 15 min postoperatively. Mean SPO2 differed significantly between Group A and Group B at base line time and at 5 minutes time only. There was no significant difference at other point of intraoperative time. Further analysis showed that there was significant difference within Group A but not in Group B (Table/Fig 3).

Mean VAS differed significantly between Group A and Group B at all time points after the operation. The VAS score was less in Group B as compared to Group A in the post operative period. Ramsay sedation score differed in group A and group B at 15 min and 30 min postoperatively only. Ramsay sedation score is more in Group B as compared to Group A at 15 and 30 minutes postoperatively (Table/Fig 4).

No prevalence of side effects such as nausea, vomiting and hypoxia were observed. Only one patient of group B (Dexmedetomidine group) developed bradycardia (Heart rate <50 beats/minute) which was treated with injection Atropine 0.6 mg mg i.v.


Preoperative anxiety is a frequent medical condition. It may lead to psychological trauma and increase the release of stress hormones (1),(2). Various agents have been used to relieve the anxiety and provide sedation. Benzodiazepines are most frequently used drugs. Midazolam is the medication from this group having rapid onset and short lasting effect and can be used for sedation (5),(6),(7). Dexmedetomidine which is α-2 adrenoceptor agonist having sedative, anxiolytic and sympatholytic effect and can be used in conjunction with anaesthesia for premedication (8),(9),(12).

In this study we have compared the anaesthetic and haemodynamic effects of Injection Dexmeditomidine and Injection Midazolam used as premedication in short gynaecological procedures. In this study, we enrolled 60 patients of ASA grade one and two with 30 patients in each group.In the present study there was significant reduction in HR, SBP, DBP and MAP in the Dexmedetomidine group (Group B) as compared to Midazolam group (Group A). But this decrease was within limits. Dexmedetomidine induced bradycardia was not found to be clinically challenging and can be treatable. Hypotension and bradycardia caused by Dexmedetomidine could be explained by its agonist action on central α-2 receptors which decreased the release of noradrenalin from sympathetic nervous system(8),(16).Similar results were found in the study conducted by Eren G et al., where they have done the comparison of Dexmedetomidine and three different doses of Midazolam as preoperative sedation (16). Results of the present study are also comparable to those of study done by Erkola O et al., (10), who compared the effects of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam in elective abdominal surgery. The similar results were also found in the study conducted by Kumari A et al., (17). Here they have compared the sedative and Propofol sparing effect of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam as premedicants in minor gynecological surgeries.

When respiratory rate and SpO2 values were evaluated, Dexmedetomidine caused reduction in the respiratory rate as compared to Midazolam but without compromising the SpO2 values in both the groups. Similar results were obtained in the studies done to see the effects of Dexmedetomidine on respiratory parameters like in the study done by Hall JE and colleagues (18). Venn RM et al., studied the respiratory effects of Dexmedetomidine in postoperative intensive care unit patients and found similar results (19).

Sedative and anxiolytic effects of both the drugs were studied with the help of Ramsay sedation score and VAS, respectively. Both Midazolam and Dexmedetomidine caused satisfactory sedation and anxiolysis in the pre and postoperative period as compared to the base line values. But Dexmedetomidine caused more intense sedation and anxiolysis as compared to Midazolam. Similar results were observed in the study conducted by Eren G et al., (16) and also in the study conducted by Anita Kumari and colleagues (17).

Side effects like hypotension and bradycardia were treated accordingly. Only one patient from Dexmedetomidine group developed bradycardia (pulse<50 beats per minute), which was treated by giving injection Atropine 0.6 mg intravenously. None of the patient from both the groups developed apnoea or desaturation. None of the patient had nausea or vomiting either.


Study was done for gynaecological procedures only and it can be used for other short procedures.


Dexmedetomidine is more effective as a sedative agent than Midazolam when used for minor gynaecological procedures. Although Dexmedetomidine caused significant reduction in SBP, DBP, MAP and HR, it maintained haemodynamic stability well within limits without causing any adverse effects.


Miller RD. Miller's Anesthesia. 4th edition. Philadelphia; Churchill Livingstone; 1994. psychological preparation and preoperative medication in anesthesia;pp. 1015-6.
Aho M, Scheinin M, Lehtinen AM, Erkola O, Vuorinen J, Korttila K.Intramuscularly administered Dexmedetomidine attenuates hemodynamic and stress hormone response to gynecologic laparoscopy. Anaesthesia Analgesia. 1992;75(6)932-39. [crossref]
Maze M, Tranquilli W. Alpha-2 adrenoceptor agonist: Defining the role in clinical anaesthesia. Anaesthesiology. 1991;74(3):581-605. [crossref]
Barash PG, Cullen BF, Stolting RK. Hand book of clinical anaesthesia. Preoperative medication. Philadelphia,Pennsylvania: JB Lippincott; 1991. pp.22-31.
Brosius KK, Bannister CF. Oral Midazolam premedication in preadolescents and adolescents. Anesthesia Analgesia. 2002;94(1):31-36. [crossref]
Bulach R, Myles PS, Russnak M. Double- blind randomized controlled trial to determine extent of amnesia with Midazolam given immediately before general anaesthesia. Br Journal of Anaesthesia. 2005;94(3):300-05. [crossref] [PubMed]
Wong HY, Fragen RJ, Dunn K. Dose finding study of intramuscular Midazolam preanaesthetic medication in the elderly. Anesthesiology. 1991;74(4):675-79. [crossref] [PubMed]
Kallio A, Scheinin M, Koulu M, Ponkilainen R, Ruskoaho H, Viinamaki O, et al. Effects of dexmedetomidine, a selective alpha-2 adrenoceptor agonist, on hemodynamic control mechanisms. Clinical Pharmacology Ther. 1989;49(1):33-42. [crossref] [PubMed]
Dyck JB, Maze M, Haack C, Vuorilehto L, Shafer SL. The pharmacokinetics and hemodynamic effects of intravenous and intramuscular Dexmedetomidine hydrochloride in adult human volunteers. Anesthesiology. 1993;78(5):813-20. [crossref] [PubMed]
Erkola O, Korttila K, Aho M, Haasio J, Aantaa R, Kallio A. Comparison of intramuscular Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam premedication for elective abdominal hysterectomy. Anaesthesia Analgesia. 1994;79(4):646-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
Hepsev A, Akbay BK. Effects of Preanaesthetic administration of Dexmedetomidine on propofol Fentanyl Induction. Turkkiye Klinikleri J Anaesthesia Reanim. 2008;6(2):59-64.
Virtanen R, Savola JM, Saano V, Nyman L. Characterization of the selectivity, specificity and potency of Dexmedetomidine as an alpha 2-adrenoceptor agonist. Eur Journal of Pharmacology. 1988;150(1-2):09-14. [crossref]
American Society of Anaesthesiologists; ASA Physical Status Classification System;
Pagare V: Visual Analogue Scale;
Stanford School of Medicine:Ramsay Sedation Scale - Palliative Care
Eren G, Cukurova Z, Demir G, Hergunsel O, Kozanhan B, Emir NS: Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and three different doses of Midazolam in preoperative sedation. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2011;27(3);367-372. [crossref] [PubMed]
Kumari A, Singh AP, Vidhan J, Gupta R. The sedative and Propofol sparing effect of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam as premedicants in minor gyanaecological day care surgeries:A randomized placebo controlled study. Anaesthesia essays and Researches. 2018;12(2);423-27. [crossref] [PubMed]
Hall JE, Uhrich TD, Barney JA, Arain SR, Ebert TJ. Sedative amnestic and analgesic properties of small-dose Dexmedetomidine infusions. Anaesthesia Analgesia. 2000;90(3);699-705. [crossref] [PubMed]
Venn RM, Hell J, Grounds RM. Respiratory effects of Dexmedetomidine in the surgical patients requiring intensive care. Crit Care. 2000;4(5):302-08. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/56374.16460

Date of Submission: Mar 15, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Apr 05, 2022
Date of Acceptance: May 09, 2022
Date of Publishing: Jun 01, 2022

• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

• Plagiarism X-checker: Apr 04, 2022
• Manual Googling: Apr 23, 2022
• iThenticate Software: May 31, 2022 (23%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)