The effect of dexmedetomidine versus propofol in traumatic brain injury: evaluation of some hemodynamic and intracranial pressure changes

Background Cerebral edema and increased intracranial pressure are of the major consequences of traumatic brain injury that affects the outcome. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of dexmedetomidine as an adjunct to conventional sedative therapy (propofol) compared to conventional sedative therapy alone in patients with traumatic brain injury, as regards its effects on hemodynamics and intracranial pressure. Methods This prospective randomized controlled clinical trial with 60 agitated and restless traumatic brain-injured patients was performed between May 2013 and May 2017. Patients who required mechanical ventilation, Glasgow coma scale (GCS) < 8, or hemodynamically instable were excluded. Patients were randomized into three equal groups: dexmedetomidine was infused in a dose of 0.5 μg/kg/h for 48 h in the first group, propofol 1% was infused in a dose of 4 mg/kg/h for 48 h in the second group, and dexmedetomidine was infused in a dose of 0.2 μg/kg/h and propofol was infused in a dose of 2 mg/kg/h for 48 h in the third group. ICP and CPP excursions and complications were assessed in the first 48 h. Results The number of ICP and CPP excursions per day was not significantly different between the three groups. Tachycardia, bradycardia, and hypertension in the three groups were statistically insignificant. As regards hypotension, there was a statistically significant difference between the three studied groups. Conclusion Dexmedetomidine or its combination with propofol is as effective as propofol alone in TBI; all alternatives are equal as regards the degree of sedation, effect on intracranial pressure, and cerebral perfusion pressure. The incidence of complications does not vary greatly between all groups. Trial registration 17200257 registered 5/2013