Journals / Çukurova Anestezi ve Cerrahi Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 3

Dexmedetomidine May Delay Intubation in Patients With Severe COVID-19

Şiddetli COVID-19 Hastalarında Deksmedetomidin Entübasyonu Geciktirebilir

Pages
676–684
Publication Date
2026-09-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

No significant differences were observed between groups regarding laboratory findings, mortality, intubation rates, comorbidities, or other treatments.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim/Objective: Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a highly selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist, has sedative, analgesic, anxiolytic, and immunomodulatory properties that may provide benefits in critically ill patients with COVID-19.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aimed to evaluate the effect of DEX on clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 treated in the intensive care unit (ICU).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:No significant differences were observed between groups regarding laboratory findings, mortality, intubation rates, comorbidities, or other treatments.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:COVID-19 · Deksmedetomidin · Entübasyon

Abstract

Aim/Objective: Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a highly selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist, has sedative, analgesic, anxiolytic, and immunomodulatory properties that may provide benefits in critically ill patients with COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of DEX on clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 treated in the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients admitted to the ICUs of Sakarya University Training and Research Hospital with a diagnosis of COVID-19 between October 2020 and February 2021. A total of 134 patients were included, of whom 45 received DEX and 89 did not. DEX infusion was discontinued upon intubation. Patients receiving DEX in addition to standard care were classified as the DEX group, while those receiving other sedatives or no sedative treatment were classified as the non-DEX group. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, and outcome data were compared between groups. Results: The median age of the study population was 64 years, and 62.7% were male. Age distributions were similar between groups (p>0.05). Patients with diabetes mellitus and those receiving insulin therapy were less likely to receive DEX (p=0.040 and p=0.016, respectively). The median time from ICU admission to intubation was significantly longer in the DEX group than in the non-DEX group (4 vs. 1 day, p<0.001). No significant differences were observed between groups regarding laboratory findings, mortality, intubation rates, comorbidities, or other treatments.

Özet

Amaç: Yüksek seçiciliğe sahip bir α2-adrenoseptör agonisti olan deksmedetomidin (DEX), sedatif, analjezik, anksiyolitik ve immünomodülatör özellikleri sayesinde kritik hastalarda yararlı etkiler gösterebilmektedir. Bu çalışmada, yoğun bakım ünitesinde (YBÜ) tedavi edilen şiddetli COVID-19 hastalarında DEX kullanımının klinik sonuçlar üzerindeki etkisinin değerlendirilmesi amaçlandı. Yöntem: Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi yoğun bakım ünitelerine Ekim 2020 ile Şubat 2021 tarihleri arasında COVID-19 tanısıyla yatırılan hastaların tıbbi kayıtları retrospektif olarak incelendi. Çalışmaya toplam 134 hasta dahil edildi; bunların 45’i DEX tedavisi alırken 89’u DEX almamıştı. DEX infüzyonu entübasyon sonrasında sonlandırıldı. Standart tedaviye ek olarak DEX alan hastalar DEX grubu, diğer sedatif ajanları alan veya sedatif tedavi almayan hastalar ise non-DEX grubu olarak sınıflandırıldı. Demografik özellikler, klinik veriler, laboratuvar bulguları ve hasta sonuçları iki grup arasında karşılaştırıldı. Bulgular: Çalışma popülasyonunun medyan yaşı 64 yıl olup hastaların %62,7’si erkekti. Yaş dağılımları açısından gruplar arasında anlamlı farklılık saptanmadı (p>0,05). Diabetes mellitus tanısı bulunan ve insülin tedavisi kullanan hastaların DEX alma olasılığı daha düşüktü (sırasıyla p=0,040 ve p=0,016). Yoğun bakıma kabul ile entübasyon arasındaki medyan süre DEX grubunda non-DEX grubuna göre anlamlı derecede daha uzundu (4 güne karşı 1 gün, p<0,001). Bununla birlikte laboratuvar bulguları, mortalite oranları, entübasyon oranları, komorbid hastalıklar ve uygulanan diğer tedaviler açısından gruplar arasında anlamlı farklılık saptanmadı. Sonuç: DEX tedavisi şiddetli COVID-19 hastalarında entübasyona kadar geçen süreyi uzatabilir; ancak mortalite üzerinde anlamlı bir azalma sağlamamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

İşsever, K., Genç, A. B., Genç, A. C., Çekiç, D., Yaylacı, S. (2026). Dexmedetomidine May Delay Intubation in Patients With Severe COVID-19. Çukurova Anestezi ve Cerrahi Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 3, 676–684. https://doi.org/10.36516/jocass.1970016

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Shennan AH, Story L; Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Cervical Cerclage: Green-top Guideline No. 75. BJOG. 2022;129(7):1178–1210. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.17003.
  2. Shennan A, Story L, Jacobsson B, Grobman WA; FIGO Working Group for Preterm Birth. FIGO good practice recommendations on cervical cerclage for prevention of preterm birth. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2021;155(1):19–22. doi:10.1002/ijgo.13835.
  3. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), Temming L, Mikhail E; SMFM Publications Committee. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #65: Transabdominal cerclage. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023;228(6):B2–B10. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2023.02.018.
  4. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Laparoscopic cerclage for cervical incompetence to prevent late miscarriage or preterm birth. HealthTech guidance 500. Published January 30, 2019.
  5. Hulshoff CC, Hofstede A, Inthout J, et al. The effectiveness of transabdominal cerclage placement via laparoscopy or laparotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023;5(1):100757. doi:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100757.
  6. Abdulrahman N, Burger NB, Hehenkamp WJK, Maghsoudlou P, Einarsson JI, Huirne JAF. Favorable surgical and obstetrical outcomes in pre- and postconceptional laparoscopic abdominal cerclage: a large multicenter cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2024;6(1):101227. doi:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101227.
  7. Shennan A, Chandiramani M, Bennett P, et al. MAVRIC: a multicenter randomized controlled trial of transabdominal vs transvaginal cervical cerclage. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(3):261.e1–261.e9. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2019.09.040.
  8. Mudrik A, Levy R, Petrecca A, et al. Guidelines on cerclage placement: a comparative systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2025;7(9):101727. doi:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2025.101727.
  9. Bobotis S, Arsenaki E, Hamilton K, et al. Transabdominal vs transvaginal cervical cerclage in the prevention of preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2025;233(6):572–580.e26. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2025.07.026.
  10. Tian S, Zhao S, Hu Y. Comparison of laparoscopic abdominal cerclage and transvaginal cerclage for the treatment of cervical insufficiency: a retrospective study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2021;303(4):1017–1023. doi:10.1007/s00404-020-05893-9.
  11. Clark NV, Einarsson JI. Laparoscopic abdominal cerclage: a highly effective option for refractory cervical insufficiency. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(4):717–722. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.02.007.
  12. Ades A, Hawkins DP. Laparoscopic transabdominal cerclage and subsequent pregnancy outcomes when left in situ. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(6):1195–1198. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000003263.