-
Anaesthesia Jan 2021Regional anaesthesia in children has evolved rapidly in the last decade. Although it previously consisted of primarily neuraxial techniques, the practice now...
Regional anaesthesia in children has evolved rapidly in the last decade. Although it previously consisted of primarily neuraxial techniques, the practice now incorporates advanced peripheral nerve blocks, which were only recently described in adults. These novel blocks provide new avenues for providing opioid-sparing analgesia while minimising invasiveness, and perhaps risk, associated with older techniques. At the same time, established methods, such as infant spinal anaesthesia, under-utilised in the last 20 years, are experiencing a revival. The impetus has been the concern regarding the potential long-term neurocognitive effects of general anaesthesia in the young child. These techniques have expanded from single shot spinal anaesthesia to combined spinal/epidural techniques, which can now effectively provide surgical anaesthesia for procedures below the umbilicus for a prolonged period of time, thereby avoiding the need for general anaesthesia. Continuous 2-chloroprocaine infusions, previously only described for intra-operative regional anaesthesia, have gained popularity as a means of providing prolonged postoperative analgesia in epidural and continuous nerve block techniques. The rapid, liver-independent metabolism of 2-chloroprocaine makes it ideal for prolonged local anaesthetic infusions in neonates and small infants, obviating the increased risk of local anaesthetic systemic toxicity that occurs with amide local anaesthetics. Debate continues over certain practices in paediatric regional anaesthesia. While the rarity of complications makes comparative analyses difficult, data from large prospective registries indicate that providing regional anaesthesia to children while under general anaesthesia appears to be at least as safe as in the sedated or awake patient. In addition, the estimated frequency of serious adverse events demonstrates that regional blocks in children under general anaesthesia are no less safe than in awake adults. In infants, the techniques of direct thoracic epidural placement or caudal placement with cephalad threading each have distinct advantages and disadvantages. As the data cannot support the safety of one technique over the other, the site of epidural insertion remains largely a matter of anaesthetist discretion.
Topics: Adolescent; Anesthesia, Conduction; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Pediatrics
PubMed: 33426659
DOI: 10.1111/anae.15283 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jan 2023Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common neurological system disorder in surgical patients. The choice of anesthetic can potentially reduce POCD. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a common neurological system disorder in surgical patients. The choice of anesthetic can potentially reduce POCD. The authors performed this network meta-analysis to compare different anesthetic drugs in reducing the incidence of POCD for elderly people undergoing noncardiac surgery. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science for randomized controlled trials comparing the different anesthetic drugs for noncardiac surgery in elderly from inception until July, 2022. The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD#42020183014). A total of 34 trials involving 4314 patients undergoing noncardiac surgery in elderly were included. The incidence of POCD for each anesthetic drug was placebo (27.7%), dexmedetomidine (12.9%), ketamine (15.2%), propofol (16.8%), fentanyl (23.9%), midazolam (11.3%), sufentanil (6.3%), sevoflurane (24.0%), and desflurane (28.3%). Pairwise and network meta-analysis showed dexmedetomidine was significantly reducing the incidence of POCD when compared with placebo. Network meta-analysis also suggested dexmedetomidine was significantly reducing the incidence of POCD when compared with sevoflurane. Sufentanil and dexmedetomidine ranked the first and second in reducing the incidence of POCD with the surface under the cumulative ranking curve value of 87.4 and 81.5%. Sufentanil and dexmedetomidine had the greatest possibility to reduce the incidence of POCD for elderly people undergoing noncardiac surgery.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Sevoflurane; Anesthetics, Inhalation; Dexmedetomidine; Postoperative Cognitive Complications; Sufentanil; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 36799783
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000001 -
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 -
The Journal of Arthroplasty Oct 2022Periarticular injection (PAI) is administered intraoperatively to help reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption after primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Periarticular injection (PAI) is administered intraoperatively to help reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption after primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PAI in primary TJA to support the combined clinical practice guidelines of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Hip Society, Knee Society, and American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine.
METHODS
The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for studies published prior to March 2020 on PAI in TJA. All included studies underwent qualitative and quantitative homogeneity testing followed by a systematic review and direct comparison meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of PAI.
RESULTS
Three thousand six hundred and ninety nine publications were critically appraised to provide 60 studies regarded as the best available evidence for an analysis. The meta-analysis showed that intraoperative PAI reduces postoperative pain and opioid consumption. Adding ketorolac or a corticosteroid to a long-acting local anesthetic (eg, ropivacaine or bupivacaine) provides an additional benefit. There is no difference between liposomal bupivacaine and other nonliposomal long-acting local anesthetics. Morphine does not provide any additive benefit in postoperative pain and opioid consumption and may increase postoperative nausea and vomiting. There is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on the use of epinephrine and clonidine.
CONCLUSION
Strong evidence supports the use of a PAI with a long-acting local anesthetic to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption. Adding a corticosteroid and/or ketorolac to a long-acting local anesthetic further reduces postoperative pain and may reduce opioid consumption. Morphine has no additive effect and there is insufficient evidence on epinephrine and clonidine.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthetics, Local; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Bupivacaine; Clonidine; Epinephrine; Humans; Injections, Intra-Articular; Ketorolac; Morphine; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Ropivacaine
PubMed: 36162925
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2022.03.045 -
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 -
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 -
Disease Markers 2022Hysteroscopy is a minimally invasive gynecologic technique that is widely practiced in outpatient procedures. The choice of anesthesia is a key factor for the surgical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Hysteroscopy is a minimally invasive gynecologic technique that is widely practiced in outpatient procedures. The choice of anesthesia is a key factor for the surgical outcome and postoperative recovery. This study was conducted to assess the effects of different anesthetic modalities based on dexmedetomidine in outpatient hysteroscopic surgery anesthesia.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis of outpatient hysteroscopic surgery anesthesia. We searched Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane-Library from database inception to December 31, 2021. Duplicate literature was excluded and screened separately for initial screening at three tiers: article title, abstract, and full text before deciding whether to include in this study against the above criteria. Results after analysis of categorical variables were expressed as ORR Ratio (95% CI) and continuous variables were expressed as Mean Difference (95% CI). Data collation and analyses were performed using the gemtc package in the R language.
RESULTS
Four trials were finally included with data for 301 participants, three anesthetic drugs, and five anesthetic modalities. A fixed-effects model was used for the different anesthesia modalities without significant heterogeneity (all I2<20%) in the analysis of adverse events (AEs), the incidence of respiratory depression, operative time, and time in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Remimazolam tosylate was associated with a lower incidence of AEs versus dexmedetomidine, and significant differences between dexmedetomidine and propofol were absent. Propofol and various doses of remimazolam tosylate resulted in a lower incidence of respiratory depression versus dexmedetomidine, with an absence of differences between propofol and dexmedetomidine. The operative time for different anesthetic modalities was, in descending order, dexmedetomidine < remimazolam tosylate (0.60 mg/kg/h <0.48 mg/kg/h) < propofol < remimazolam tosylate (1.00 mg/kg/h), despite the absence of intergroup differences. Propofol was associated with a longer time in PACU versus dexmedetomidine and remimazolam tosylate (1.00 mg/kg/h); those of dexmedetomidine and remimazolam tosylate (1.00 mg/kg/h) were similar. The time in PACU for different anesthetic modalities, in descending order, was dexmedetomidine < remimazolam tosylate (1.00 mg/kg/h) < propofol. Propofol was associated with a longer time in PACU versus dexmedetomidine and remimazolam tosylate.
CONCLUSION
In outpatient hysteroscopic surgery anesthesia, dexmedetomidine was associated with a higher incidence of AEs and respiratory depression and a shorter operative time and time in PACU versus remimazolam tosylate and propofol. Remimazolam tosylate showed safety benefits with a similar duration of PACU stay versus dexmedetomidine. Therefore, the choice of anesthetic drugs in outpatient surgery requires consideration of the patient's conditions and preferences.
Topics: Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; Anesthetics; Dexmedetomidine; Female; Humans; Hysteroscopy; Network Meta-Analysis; Outpatients; Pregnancy; Propofol; Respiratory Insufficiency
PubMed: 36188426
DOI: 10.1155/2022/2408685 -
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