-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019The use of clinical signs, or end-tidal anaesthetic gas (ETAG), may not be reliable in measuring the hypnotic component of anaesthesia and may lead to either overdosage...
BACKGROUND
The use of clinical signs, or end-tidal anaesthetic gas (ETAG), may not be reliable in measuring the hypnotic component of anaesthesia and may lead to either overdosage or underdosage resulting in adverse effects because of too deep or too light anaesthesia. Intraoperative awareness, whilst uncommon, may lead to serious psychological disturbance, and alternative methods to monitor the depth of anaesthesia may reduce the incidence of serious events. Bispectral index (BIS) is a numerical scale based on electrical activity in the brain. Using a BIS monitor to guide the dose of anaesthetic may have advantages over clinical signs or ETAG. This is an update of a review last published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of BIS to reduce the risk of intraoperative awareness and early recovery times from general anaesthesia in adults undergoing surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science on 26 March 2019. We searched clinical trial registers and grey literature, and handsearched reference lists of included studies and related reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in which BIS was used to guide anaesthesia compared with standard practice which was either clinical signs or end-tidal anaesthetic gas (ETAG) to guide the anaesthetic dose. We included adult participants undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia regardless of whether included participants had a high risk of intraoperative awareness. We included only studies in which investigators aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of BIS for its role in monitoring intraoperative depth of anaesthesia or potential improvements in early recovery times from anaesthesia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 52 studies with 41,331 participants; two studies were quasi-randomized and the remaining studies were RCTs. All studies included participants undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia. Three studies recruited only participants who were at high risk of intraoperative awareness, whilst two studies specifically recruited an unselected participant group. We analysed the data according to two comparison groups: BIS versus clinical signs; and BIS versus ETAG. Forty-eight studies used clinical signs as a comparison method, which included titration of anaesthesia according to criteria such as blood pressure or heart rate and, six studies used ETAG to guide anaesthesia. Whilst BIS target values differed between studies, all were within a range of values between 40 to 60.BIS versus clinical signsWe found low-certainty evidence that BIS-guided anaesthesia may reduce the risk of intraoperative awareness in a surgical population that were unselected or at high risk of awareness (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.60; I = 61%; 27 studies; 9765 participants). However, events were rare with only five of 27 studies with reported incidences; we found that incidences of intraoperative awareness when BIS was used were three per 1000 (95% CI 2 to 6 per 1000) compared to nine per 1000 when anaesthesia was guided by clinical signs. Of the five studies with event data, one included participants at high risk of awareness and one included unselected participants, four used a structured questionnaire for assessment, and two used an adjudication process to identify confirmed or definite awareness.Early recovery times were also improved when BIS was used. We found low-certainty evidence that BIS may reduce the time to eye opening by mean difference (MD) 1.78 minutes (95% CI -2.53 to -1.03 minutes; 22 studies; 1494 participants), the time to orientation by MD 3.18 minutes (95% CI -4.03 to -2.33 minutes; 6 studies; 273 participants), and the time to discharge from the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU) by MD 6.86 minutes (95% CI -11.72 to -2 minutes; 13 studies; 930 participants).BIS versus ETAGAgain, events of intraoperative awareness were extremely rare, and we found no evidence of a difference in incidences of intraoperative awareness according to whether anaesthesia was guided by BIS or by ETAG in a surgical population at unselected or at high risk of awareness (Peto OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.56 to 2.26; I = 37%; 5 studies; 26,572 participants; low-certainty evidence). Incidences of intraoperative awareness were one per 1000 in both groups. Only three of five studies reported events, two included participants at high risk of awareness and one included unselected participants, all used a structured questionnaire for assessment and an adjudication process to identify confirmed or definite awareness.One large study (9376 participants) reported a reduced time to discharge from the PACU by a median of three minutes less, and we judged the certainty of this evidence to be low. No studies measured or reported the time to eye opening and the time to orientation.Certainty of the evidenceWe used GRADE to downgrade the evidence for all outcomes to low certainty. The incidence of intraoperative awareness is so infrequent such that, despite the inclusion of some large multi-centre studies in analyses, we believed that the effect estimates were imprecise. In addition, analyses included studies that we judged to have limitations owing to some assessments of high or unclear bias and in all studies, it was not possible to blind anaesthetists to the different methods of monitoring depth of anaesthesia.Studies often did not report a clear definition of intraoperative awareness. Time points of measurement differed, and methods used to identify intraoperative awareness also differed and we expected that some assessment tools were more comprehensive than others.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Intraoperative awareness is infrequent and, despite identifying a large number of eligible studies, evidence for the effectiveness of using BIS to guide anaesthetic depth is imprecise. We found that BIS-guided anaesthesia compared to clinical signs may reduce the risk of intraoperative awareness and improve early recovery times in people undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia but we found no evidence of a difference between BIS-guided anaesthesia and ETAG-guided anaesthesia. We found six studies awaiting classification and two ongoing studies; inclusion of these studies in future updates may increase the certainty of the evidence.
Topics: Anesthesia Recovery Period; Anesthesia, General; Anesthetics; Electroencephalography; Humans; Intraoperative Awareness; Monitoring, Intraoperative; Postoperative Period; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31557307
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003843.pub4 -
JAMA Network Open Jun 2022Clinical studies of neurodevelopmental outcomes after anesthetic exposure have evaluated a range of outcomes with mixed results. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Clinical studies of neurodevelopmental outcomes after anesthetic exposure have evaluated a range of outcomes with mixed results.
OBJECTIVE
To examine via meta-analyses the associations between exposure to general anesthesia and domain-specific neurodevelopmental outcomes in children.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to August 31, 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Inclusion criteria were exposures to procedures requiring general anesthesia at younger than 18 years and evaluation of long-term neurodevelopmental function after exposure. Studies lacking unexposed controls or focused on children with major underlying comorbidities were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Extracted variables included effect size; hazard, risk, or odds ratio; number of exposures; procedure type; major comorbidities; age of exposure and assessment; presence of unexposed controls; and study design. Studies were independently reviewed by 2 coders, and review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The main outcomes were standardized mean differences (SMD) for scores in the neurodevelopmental domains of academics, behavioral problems, cognition, executive function, general development, language, motor function, nonverbal reasoning, social cognition, and hazard and risk of neurodevelopmental disorder diagnoses.
RESULTS
A total of 31 studies contributed data for meta-analysis. For each of the assessed neurodevelopmental domains, the numbers of children evaluated ranged from 571 to 63 315 exposed and 802 to 311 610 unexposed. Children with any exposure (single or multiple) had significantly worse behavioral problems scores, indicating more behavioral problems (SMD, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.18 to -0.02; P = .02), and worse scores in academics (SMD, -0.07; 95% CI -0.12 to -0.01; P = .02), cognition (SMD, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.00; P = .03), executive function (SMD, -0.20; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.09; P < .001), general development (SMD, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.13 to -0.02; P = .01), language (SMD, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.14 to -0.02; P = .01), motor function (SMD, -0.11; 95% CI, -0.21 to -0.02; P = .02), and nonverbal reasoning (SMD, -0.15; 95% CI, -0.27 to -0.02; P = .02). Higher incidences of neurodevelopmental disorder diagnoses were also reported (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.30; P < .001; risk ratio, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.61; P = .002).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These findings support the hypothesis that associations between anesthetic exposure during childhood and subsequent neurodevelopmental deficits differ based on neurodevelopmental domain.
Topics: Anesthetics; Child; Cognition; Comorbidity; Executive Function; Humans
PubMed: 35708687
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.17427 -
Pain Physician Oct 2022Epidural injections are among the most commonly performed procedures for managing low back and lower extremity pain. Pinto et al and Chou et al previously performed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Epidural injections are among the most commonly performed procedures for managing low back and lower extremity pain. Pinto et al and Chou et al previously performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which, along with a recent update from Oliveira et al showing the lack of effectiveness of epidural steroid injections in managing lumbar disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and radiculopathy. In contrast to these papers, multiple other systematic reviews and meta-analyses have supported the effectiveness and use of epidural injections utilizing fluoroscopically guided techniques. A major flaw in the review can be related to attributing active-controlled trials to placebo-controlled trials. The assumption that local anesthetics do not provide sustained benefit, despite extensive evidence that local anesthetics provide long-term relief, similar to a combination of local anesthetic with steroids is flawed.
STUDY DESIGN
The Cochrane Review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain with sciatica or lumbar radiculopathy were reanalyzed using systematic methodology and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To re-evaluate Cochrane data on RCTs of epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain with sciatica or lumbar radiculopathy utilizing qualitative and quantitative techniques with dual-arm and single-arm analysis.
METHODS
In this systematic review, we have used the same RCTs from the Cochrane Review of a minimum of 20% change in pain scale or significant pain relief of >= 50%. The outcome measures were pain relief and functional status improvement. Significant improvement was defined as 50% or greater pain relief and functional status improvement. Our review was performed utilizing the Cochrane Review methodologic quality assessment and the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM-QRB). Evidence was summarized utilizing the principles of best evidence synthesis and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system. Clinical relevance of the pragmatic nature of each study was assessed.
RESULTS
In evaluating the RCTs in the Cochrane Review, 10 trials were performed with fluoroscopic guidance. Utilizing conventional dual-arm and single-arm meta-analysis, the evidence is vastly different from the interpretation of the data within the Cochrane Review. The overall combined evidence is Level I, or strong evidence, at one and 3 months, and Level II, or moderate evidence, at 6 and 12 months.
LIMITATIONS
The limitation of this study is that only data contained in the Cochrane Review were analyzed.
CONCLUSION
A comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of the Cochrane Review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain with sciatica or lumbar radiculopathy yielded different results. This review, based on the evidence derived from placebo-controlled trials and active-controlled trials showed Level I, or strong evidence, at one and 3 months and Level II at 6 and 12 months. This review once again emphasizes the importance of the allocation of studies to placebo-control and active-control groups, utilizing standards of practice with inclusion of only the studies performed under fluoroscopic guidance.
Topics: Humans; Radiculopathy; Anesthetics, Local; Sciatica; Low Back Pain; Injections, Epidural; Steroids
PubMed: 36288577
DOI: No ID Found -
Cureus Aug 2023This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effectiveness of topical anesthetics in preventing premature ejaculation. We conducted an online database search for... (Review)
Review
This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effectiveness of topical anesthetics in preventing premature ejaculation. We conducted an online database search for original studies comparing topical anesthetic agents with placebo in patients with premature ejaculation. After selecting relevant articles, we extracted data on baseline characteristics and predetermined endpoints. Intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) was the primary outcome for efficacy. Mean differences and corresponding 95% confidence intervals were used to present continuous data. A random-effects model was used to pool the data, and subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of anesthetic agent used. Eleven randomized controlled trials were examined, involving a total of 2008 participants. After analyzing the combined results, it was found that Severance Secret (SS) cream (CJ CheilJedang Corporation, Seoul, South Korea) demonstrated significantly higher effectiveness than a placebo in increasing IELT (P = 0.001). Similarly, the topical eutectic mixture for premature ejaculation (TEMPE), lidocaine, and the eutectic mixture of local anesthetics (EMLA) were significantly more efficient than a placebo (P<0.00001; P = 0.0001; P<0.00001). Additionally, it was found that lidocaine gel was more efficient than paroxetine or sildenafil (P = 0.04; P<0.00001). In conclusion, topical anesthetics increase IELT in men with premature ejaculation more effectively than placebo, sildenafil, tadalafil, paroxetine, and dapoxetine.
PubMed: 37664322
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.42913 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2023Aortic aneurysms occur when the aorta, the body's largest artery, grows in size, and can occur in the thoracic or abdominal aorta. The approaches to repair aortic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Aortic aneurysms occur when the aorta, the body's largest artery, grows in size, and can occur in the thoracic or abdominal aorta. The approaches to repair aortic aneurysms include directly exposing the aorta and replacing the diseased segment via open repair, or endovascular repair. Endovascular repair uses fluoroscopic-guidance to access the aorta and deliver a device to exclude the aneurysmal aortic segment without requiring a large surgical incision. Endovascular repair can be performed under a general anesthetic, during which the unconscious patient is paralyzed and reliant on an anesthetic machine to maintain the airway and provide oxygen to the lungs, or a loco-regional anesethetic, for which medications are administered to provide the person with sufficient sedation and pain control without requiring a general anesthetic. While people undergoing general anesthesia are more likely to remain still during surgery and have a well-controlled airway in the event of unanticipated complications, loco-regional anesthesia is associated with fewer postoperative complications in some studies. It remains unclear which anesthetic technique is associated with better outcomes following the endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of general anesthesia compared to loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was 11 March 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for all randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of general anesthesia compared to loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay. Our secondary outcomes were: incidence of endoleaks, requirement for re-intervention, incidence of myocardial infarction, quality of life, incidence of respiratory complications, incidence of pulmonary embolism, incidence of deep vein thrombosis, and length of procedure. We planned to use GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We found no studies, published or ongoing, that met our inclusion criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not identify any randomized controlled trials that compared general versus loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. There is currently insufficient high-quality evidence to determine the benefits or harms of either anesthetic approach during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Well-designed prospective randomized trials with relevant clinical outcomes are needed to adequately address this.
Topics: Humans; Anesthesia, Conduction; Anesthesia, General; Anesthetics, General; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Endovascular Procedures; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life
PubMed: 37052421
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013182.pub2 -
Dental and Medical Problems 2022Many complications can occur after the injection of local intraoral anesthetics (ILIA) before dental intervention. Facial paralysis (FP) is one of these complications.... (Review)
Review
Many complications can occur after the injection of local intraoral anesthetics (ILIA) before dental intervention. Facial paralysis (FP) is one of these complications. The purpose of this study was to systematically analyze the association between ILIA and FP. A systematic review was carried out taking into account the methodology of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA statement. The search strategy used "Palsy AND Facial" and "Paralysis AND Facial" as search terms. The ScienceDirect, PubMed and Scopus databases were searched using the "dentistry journal" filter. The inclusion criteria included studies describing FP after or during ILIA that were published in dental journals. The CAse REports (CARE) checklist was applied in evaluating the methodological quality of case reports. A total of 2,462 articles (algorithm) were identified. After reviewing titles and abstracts, 18 articles were deemed relevant taking into account the objectives of this study. Only 13 of them, after reading the full text, met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Case reports on 18 cases of FP were analyzed, 12 of which described the early development of FP (onset within 24 h) and 6 the late development (onset after 24 h). Acceptable compliance with CARE guidelines was observed in the included studies . Early FP CRs presented the effect of the administered anesthetic on the facial nerve, and the vascular effect of the vasoconstrictor included in the anesthetic formula, while more recent FP CRs focused on the reactivation of herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1), human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6) or varicella-zoster virus (VZV).
Topics: Humans; Facial Paralysis; Herpesvirus 1, Human; Herpesvirus 3, Human; Face; Anesthetics
PubMed: 36583841
DOI: 10.17219/dmp/138910 -
Frontiers in Pain Research (Lausanne,... 2022The anesthetic management of fetal operative procedures (FOP) is a highly debated topic. Literature on fetal pain perception and response to external stimuli is rapidly... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The anesthetic management of fetal operative procedures (FOP) is a highly debated topic. Literature on fetal pain perception and response to external stimuli is rapidly expanding. Nonetheless, there is no consensus on the fetal consciousness nor on the instruments to measure pain levels. As a result, no guidelines or clinical recommendations on anesthesia modality during FOP are available. This systematic literature review aimed to collect the available knowledge on the most common fetal interventions, and summarize the reported outcomes for each anesthetic approach. Additional aim was to provide an overall evaluation of the most commonly used anesthetic agents.
METHODS
Two systematic literature searches were performed in Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to December 2021. To best cover the available evidence, one literature search was mostly focused on fetal surgical procedures; while anesthesia during FOP was the main target for the second search. The following fetal procedures were included: fetal transfusion, laser ablation of placental anastomosis, twin-reversed arterial perfusion treatment, fetoscopic endoluminal tracheal occlusion, thoraco-amniotic shunt, vesico-amniotic shunt, myelomeningocele repair, resection of sacrococcygeal teratoma, ligation of amniotic bands, balloon valvuloplasty/septoplasty, ex-utero intrapartum treatment, and ovarian cyst resection/aspiration. Yielded articles were screened against the same inclusion criteria. Studies reporting anesthesia details and procedures' outcomes were considered. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed and findings were reported in a narrative manner.
RESULTS
The literature searches yielded 1,679 articles, with 429 being selected for full-text evaluation. A total of 168 articles were included. Overall, no significant differences were found among procedures performed under maternal anesthesia or maternal-fetal anesthesia. Procedures requiring invasive fetal manipulation resulted to be more effective when performed under maternal anesthesia only. Based on the available data, a wide range of anesthetic agents are currently deployed and no consistency has been found neither between centers nor procedures.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review shows great variance in the anesthetic management during FOP. Further studies, systematically reporting intraoperative fetal monitoring and fetal hormonal responses to external stimuli, are necessary to identify the best anesthetic approach. Additional investigations on pain pathways and fetal pain perception are advisable.
PubMed: 36246050
DOI: 10.3389/fpain.2022.935427 -
Journal of the American Dental... Jan 2023Local anesthesia is essential for pain control in dentistry. The authors assessed the comparative effect of local anesthetics on acute dental pain after tooth extraction... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Local anesthesia is essential for pain control in dentistry. The authors assessed the comparative effect of local anesthetics on acute dental pain after tooth extraction and in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.
TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED
The authors searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the US Clinical Trials registry through November 21, 2020. The authors included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing long- vs short-acting injectable anesthetics to reduce pain after tooth extraction (systematic review 1) and evaluated the effect of topical anesthetics in patients with symptomatic pulpitis (systematic review 2). Pairs of reviewers screened articles, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias using a modified version of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool. The authors assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS
Fourteen RCTs comparing long- vs short-acting local anesthetics suggest that bupivacaine may decrease the use of rescue analgesia and may not result in additional adverse effects (low certainty evidence). Bupivacaine probably reduces the amount of analgesic consumption compared with lidocaine with epinephrine (mean difference, -1.91 doses; 95% CI, -3.35 to -0.46; moderate certainty) and mepivacaine (mean difference, -1.58 doses; 95% CI, -2.21 to -0.95; moderate certainty). Five RCTs suggest that both benzocaine 10% and 20% may increase the number of people experiencing pain reduction compared with placebo when managing acute irreversible pulpitis (low certainty).
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
Bupivacaine may be superior to lidocaine with epinephrine and mepivacaine with regard to time to and amount of analgesic consumption. Benzocaine may be superior to placebo in reducing pain for 20 through 30 minutes after application.
Topics: Humans; Acute Pain; Anesthesia, Local; Anesthetics, Local; Benzocaine; Bupivacaine; Epinephrine; Lidocaine; Mepivacaine; Pulpitis
PubMed: 36608963
DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2022.10.014 -
BMC Geriatrics Nov 2023Postoperative delirium (POD) is an important complication for older patients and recent randomised controlled trials have showed a conflicting result of the effect of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postoperative delirium (POD) is an important complication for older patients and recent randomised controlled trials have showed a conflicting result of the effect of deep and light anesthesia.
METHODS
We included randomised controlled trials including older adults that evaluated the effect of anesthetic depth on postoperative delirium from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. We considered deep anesthesia as observer's assessment of the alertness/ sedation scale (OAA/S) of 0-2 or targeted bispectral (BIS) < 45 and the light anesthesia was considered OAA/S 3-5 or targeted BIS > 50. The primary outcome was incidence of POD within 7 days after surgery. And the secondary outcomes were mortality and cognitive function 3 months or more after surgery. The quality of evidence was assessed via the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach.
RESULTS
We included 6 studies represented 7736 patients aged 60 years and older. We observed that the deep anesthesia would not increase incidence of POD when compared with the light anesthesia when 4 related studies were pooled (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.63-3.08, P = 0.41, I = 82%, low certainty). And no significant was found in mortality (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.93-1.35, P = 0.23, I = 0%, high certainty) and cognitive function (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.67-1.91, P = 0.64, I = 13%, high certainty) 3 months or more after surgery between deep anesthesia and light anesthesia.
CONCLUSIONS
Low-quality evidence suggests that light general anesthesia was not associated with lower POD incidence than deep general anesthesia. And High-quality evidence showed that anesthetic depth did not affect the long-term mortality and cognitive function.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
CRD42022300829 (PROSPERO).
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Aged; Emergence Delirium; Delirium; Anesthetics; Anesthesia, General; Cognition; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37932677
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-023-04432-w -
Neurosurgical Review Oct 2021Intracranial aneurysms (IA) occur in 3-5% of the general population and may require surgical or endovascular obliteration if the patient is symptomatic or has an... (Review)
Review
Intracranial aneurysms (IA) occur in 3-5% of the general population and may require surgical or endovascular obliteration if the patient is symptomatic or has an increased risk of rupture. These procedures carry an inherent risk of neurological complications, and the outcome can be influenced by the physiological and pharmacological effects of the administered anesthetics. Despite the critical role of anesthetic agents, however, there are no current studies to systematically assess the intraoperative anesthetic risks, benefits, and outcome effects in this population. In this systematic review of the literature, we carefully examine the existing evidence on the risks and benefits of common anesthetic agents during IA obliteration, their physiological and clinical characteristics, and effects on neurological outcome. The initial search strategy captured a total of 287 published studies. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 28 studies were included in the final report. Our data showed that both volatile and intravenous anesthetics are commonly employed, without evidence that either is superior. Although no specific anesthetic regimens are promoted, their unique neurological, cardiovascular, and physiological properties may be critical to the outcome in vulnerable patients. In particular, patients at risk for perioperative ischemia may benefit from timely administration of anesthetic agents with neuroprotective properties and optimization of their physiological parameters. Further studies are warranted to examine if these anesthetic regimens can reduce the risk of neurological injury and improve the overall outcome in these patients.
Topics: Anesthetics; Aneurysm, Ruptured; Humans; Intracranial Aneurysm; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33415519
DOI: 10.1007/s10143-020-01441-w