International Journal of Clinical Research

Objective This study investigates and analyzes the efficacy of dexmedetomidine instead of propofol in male patients with urinary system. Methods The subjects were 100 male patients hospitalized in the Department of Urology of our hospital from January 2024 to December 2024. They were randomly assigned to receive dexmedetomidine group (observation group) and propofol intravenous anesthesia group (control group), 50 people in each group. Midazolam 0.1mg/kg was used to replace propofol for anesthesia induction, and dexmedetomidine 0.4ug/Kg/h was used to replace propofol for anesthesia maintenance. The recovery was evaluated by measuring the heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) of the two groups of patients before and after anesthesia. The occurrence of penile erection during surgery and the time from the beginning to the end of penile erection were recorded. Results There was no significant difference between the two groups in total intravenous propofol anesthesia during surgery (P = 0.13). The hemodynamic characteristics of the two groups were comparable, but the heart rate was significantly lower after intubation and at 60 min in the dexmedetomidine group. The mean arterial pressure was significantly reduced after the initial loading dose of the study drug in the dexmedetomidine group. (P<0.05). Conclusion Dexmedetomidine has a significant sedative effect when used during surgery. Dexmedetomidine is a simple, effective and safe method that can avoid penile erection during surgery. Dexmedetomidine has significant efficacy and safety advantages when used instead of propofol in male patients with urinary system surgery. It can be used as a sedative for patients during urological surgery in clinical practice.

Dexmedetomidine; Propofol; Urinary system