Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In recent times, non-opioid analgesic-based anaesthesia has been gaining popularity as it can achieve the goals of hypnosis, amnesia, and haemodynamic stability while avoiding opioid side effects. Our study compares the efficacy of opioid-free anaesthesia and opioid-based general anaesthesia regarding intraoperative haemodynamic stability, anaesthetic requirements, awareness, and recovery profile. METHODS: After receiving ethical approval and registering the trial, we conducted this randomised, single-blinded study on American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II patients who were aged 18-65 and were scheduled for modified radical mastectomy under general anaesthesia. Patients were randomised into two groups of 60 each. Group DL received IV dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg loading over 10 min, 10 min before induction and 0.5 μg/kg/h infusion after that along with IV lignocaine 1.5 mg/kg at bolus followed by 1.5 mg/kg/h infusion. Group MN received IV morphine 0.15 mg/kg. Standard monitoring and general anaesthesia protocol were followed. Intraoperative haemodynamics, anaesthetic requirement, extubation time, and recovery profile were monitored. Data were analysed using Stata version 14 software, and statistical tests (Chi-squared test for qualitative variables, unpaired t-test and Mann-Whitney U test for quantitative variables) were performed. RESULTS: Both groups had comparable haemodynamic stability (P > 0.05). Group DL had a significantly lower propofol requirement for induction and maintenance (P < 0.001). Ramsay sedation score (P = 0.002) and extubation time (P = 0.029) were significantly higher in Group MN. The recovery profile was favourable in Group DL, with there being lower postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine and lignocaine IV infusion demonstrated stable intraoperative haemodynamic stability, lower anaesthetic requirement, and better recovery profile than morphine without significant complications.