Tools
ToolsBasilim, Ahmed, Eljaaly, Khalid, Aljuhani, Ohoud, Korayem, Ghazwa B., Altebainawi, Ali F., Aldhmadi, Wadha J., Alissa, Abdulrahman, AlFaifi, Mashael, Alharthi, Abdullah F., Vishwakarma, Ramesh, alqahtani, Reem, Alahmari, Ghaida D., Ibn Khamis, Afnan M., Alenazi, Abeer A., Alharbi, Aisha, Alfaraj, Lulwa, Alshammari, Yasser F., Abdulqader, Marwah I., Alharbi, Mada B., Alanazi, Bayan M., Alhamazani, Atheer E. and Al Sulaiman, Khalid (2025) Evaluation of Effectiveness and Safety of Dexmedetomidine in non-Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Critically ill Patients: A Multicentre Cohort Study. Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, 40 (1). pp. 74-84. ISSN 0885-0666
Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)Abstract
Background: Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is a highly favored sedative agent in critically ill patients owing to its anxiolytic and analgesic properties, lower risk of delirium, and minimal respiratory depression. Additionally, DEX exhibits anti-inflammatory properties, which have prompted its use in managing COVID-19 patients to mitigate cytokine storm and multi-organ dysfunction. Thus, this study aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of DEX use in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Method: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 who were admitted to the ICUs and did not require invasive mechanical ventilation (MV). Patients were categorized into two groups based on receiving DEX use within 72 h of ICU admission. The primary outcome was respiratory failure requiring invasive MV; other outcomes were considered secondary. Results: A total of 155 patients were included in the study after propensity matching. DEX did not reduce respiratory failure requiring invasive MV (HR 0.66; 95% CI (0.28, 1.53), P =.33). However, the time for invasive MV was statistically significantly shorter in the DEX group compared with the control group (beta coefficient (95%CI): - 1.05 (−2.03, −0.07), P =.03). In contrast, ICU and hospital Length of stay (LOS) were not statistically significant compared to the control group (beta coefficient 0.04 (95% CI −0.29, 0.38), P =.80, and beta coefficient - 0.03 (95% CI −0.33, 0.26), P =.81, respectively). In addition, the 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates were similar between the two groups (HR 1.1; 95% CI 0.97, 1.20, P =.14, and HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.95, 1.06, P =.90, respectively). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine did not appear to lower the risk of respiratory failure necessitating invasive mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients. However, the mean time for invasive mechanical ventilation was shorter in the DEX group. Future interventional studies are required to confirm our findings.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Additional Information: | The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | acute respiratory distress syndrome,covid-19,critically ill,dexmedetomidine,intensive care units (icus),length of stay,mechanical ventilation mv,mortality,critical care and intensive care medicine ,/dk/atira/pure/subjectarea/asjc/2700/2706 |
| Faculty \ School: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School |
| UEA Research Groups: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Centres > Public Health Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Centres > Population Health (former - to 2025) |
| Related URLs: | |
| Depositing User: | LivePure Connector |
| Date Deposited: | 14 Apr 2026 14:34 |
| Last Modified: | 19 Apr 2026 06:32 |
| URI: | https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/102778 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/08850666241268498 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |