CLINICAL TRIAL article
Front. Med.
Sec. Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesiology
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1593574
Effect of Varying Doses of Dexmedetomidine Added to Dexamethasone-Enhanced TAPB for Post-Cesarean Pain Management
Provisionally accepted- 1Department of Anesthesiology, Ningxia Medical University,, Yinchuan, China
- 2Department of Anesthesiology, People’s Hospital of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Yinchuan, China
- 3Department of Anesthesiology, General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University, Yinchuan, Henan Province, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: The management of post-cesarean pain exhibits considerable variation across different regions and hospitals, with a prevalent tendency to utilize opioid medications as the primary analgesic approach. This study investigates the impact of different doses of dexmedetomidine combined with dexamethasone as an adjunct to transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) on the analgesic efficacy and quality of recovery following cesarean section. Methods: In this prospective randomized clinical trial, 90 patients scheduled for cesarean section were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive postoperative TAPB with one of three solutions: 8 mg dexamethasone with 0.375% ropivacaine (Group C), 0.5 µg/kg dexmedetomidine with 8 mg dexamethasone and 0.375% ropivacaine (Group D1), or 1 µg/kg dexmedetomidine with 8 mg dexamethasone and 0.375% ropivacaine (Group D2). The primary outcome measures were the VAS scores for rest and movement at 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours post TAPB, as well as the incidence of moderate to severe pain. Results: Postoperative VAS scores demonstrated distinct patterns between rest and dynamic pain. At rest, no significant differences were observed among groups C, D1, and D2 at any time point (6-48 hours; all P>0.05). For dynamic pain, group C exhibited higher median scores than D1 and D2 at 12 hours (3.00 [IQR 2.00-4.00] vs 1.00 [1.00-3.00], median difference 1.00 [95% CI 1.00-2.00]; P=0.001; vs 2.00 [1.00-3.00], difference 1.00 [0.00-2.00]; P=0.003) and 24 hours (4.00 [3.00-4.00] vs D1: 3.00 [2.00-3.00], difference 1.00 [0.00-1.00]; P<0.001; vs D2: 2.00 [2.00-3.00], difference 1.00 [1.00-2.00]; P=0.009). By 48 hours, D2 showed the lowest dynamic pain scores (1.00 [1.00-2.00] vs C: 3.00 [2.00-3.00]; difference 1.00 [1.00-1.00]; P=0.001). Moderate-to-severe dynamic pain incidence differed significantly at 12 hours (C: 26.7%; D1: 13.3%; D2: 3.3%; P=0.04) and peaked in group C at 24 hours (53.3% vs D1: 13.3% [risk ratio 7.43, 95% CI 2.08-26.55; P=0.002] and D2: 10.0% [risk ratio 10.29, 2.56-41.37; P=0.001]). No intergroup differences were observed for resting pain or dynamic pain at 48 hours. Groups D1 and D2 showed no significant differences in outcomes at any time point. Conclusions: Adding dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone to ropivacaine for TAPB can improve post-cesarean section pain conditions.
Keywords: Dexmedetomidine, Dexamethasone, Nerve Blocks, Pain, Postoperative, Cesarean sections
Received: 07 Apr 2025; Accepted: 10 Jul 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Gu, Yang, Bao, Wang, Tian, Sun, Li and Ye. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Ningkang Li, Department of Anesthesiology, People’s Hospital of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Yinchuan, China
Qingshan Ye, Department of Anesthesiology, People’s Hospital of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Yinchuan, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.