-
Journal of Pediatric Surgery May 2021There is growing concern regarding the impact of general anesthesia on neurodevelopment in children. Pre-clinical animal studies have linked anesthetic exposure to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
There is growing concern regarding the impact of general anesthesia on neurodevelopment in children. Pre-clinical animal studies have linked anesthetic exposure to abnormal central nervous system development, but it is unclear whether these results translate into humans. The purpose of this systematic review from the American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) Outcomes and Evidence-Based Practice (OEBP) Committee was to review, summarize, and evaluate the evidence regarding the neurodevelopmental impact of general anesthesia on children and identify factors that may affect the risk of neurotoxicity.
METHODS
Medline, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were queried for articles published up to and including December 2017 using the search terms "general anesthesia and neurodevelopment" as well as specific anesthetic agents. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to screen manuscripts for inclusion in the review. A consensus statement of recommendations in response to each study question was synthesized based upon the best available evidence.
RESULTS
In total, 493 titles were initially identified, with 56 articles selected for full analysis and 44 included for review. Based on currently available developmental assessment tools, a single exposure to general anesthesia does not appear to have a significant effect on general neurodevelopment, although prolonged or multiple anesthetic exposures may have some adverse effects. Exposure to general anesthesia may affect different domains of development at different ages. Regional anesthetic techniques with the addition of dexmedetomidine and/or some intravenous agents may mitigate the risks of neurotoxicity. This approach may be performed safely in some patients and can be considered as an option in selected short procedures.
CONCLUSION
There is no conclusive evidence that a single short anesthetic in infancy has a detectable neurodevelopmental effect. Data do not support waiting until later in childhood to perform general anesthesia for single short procedures. With the complexities and nuances of different anesthetic methods, patients and procedures, the planning and execution of anesthesia for the pediatric patient is generally best accomplished by an anesthesiologist, ideally a pediatric anesthesiologist.
TYPE OF STUDY
Systematic review of level 1-4 studies.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level 1-4 (mainly level 3-4).
Topics: Anesthesia, General; Anesthetics; Animals; Child; Humans
PubMed: 33509654
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2021.01.002 -
Molecular Psychiatry Mar 2024To meta-analyze clinical efficacy and safety of ketamine compared with other anesthetic agents in the course of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in major depressive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To meta-analyze clinical efficacy and safety of ketamine compared with other anesthetic agents in the course of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in major depressive episode (MDE).
METHODS
PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, GoogleScholar, and US and European trial registries were searched from inception through May 23, 2023, with no language limits. We included RCTs with (1) a diagnosis of MDE; (2) ECT intervention with ketamine and/or other anesthetic agents; and (3) measures included: depressive symptoms, cognitive performance, remission or response rates, and serious adverse events. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to compare ketamine and 7 other anesthetic agents. Hedges' g standardized mean differences (SMDs) were used for continuous measures, and relative risks (RRs) were used for other binary outcomes using random-effects models.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were included in the systematic review. A total of 2322 patients from 17 RCTs were included in the NMA. The overall pooled SMD of ketamine, as compared with propofol as a reference group, was -2.21 (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.79 to -0.64) in depressive symptoms, indicating that ketamine had better antidepressant efficacy than propofol. In a sensitivity analysis, however, ketamine-treated patients had a worse outcome in cognitive performance than propofol-treated patients (SMD, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.28 to -0.09). No other statistically significant differences were found.
CONCLUSIONS
Ketamine-assisted ECT is tolerable and may be efficacious in improving depressive symptoms, but a relative adverse impact on cognition may be an important clinical consideration. Anesthetic agents should be considered based on patient profiles and/or preferences to improve effectiveness and safety of ECT use.
Topics: Ketamine; Electroconvulsive Therapy; Humans; Depressive Disorder, Major; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Propofol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anesthetics; Female; Male
PubMed: 38123725
DOI: 10.1038/s41380-023-02366-8 -
The Journal of Arthroplasty Oct 2022Regional nerve blocks are widely used in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption. The purpose of our study was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Regional nerve blocks are widely used in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regional nerve blocks after TKA in support of 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 Management.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published before March 24, 2020 on femoral nerve block, adductor canal block, and infiltration between Popliteal Artery and Capsule of Knee in primary TKA. 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 the regional nerve blocks compared to a control, local peri-articular anesthetic infiltration (PAI), or between regional nerve blocks.
RESULTS
Critical appraisal of 1,673 publications yielded 56 publications representing the best available evidence for analysis. Femoral nerve and adductor canal blocks are effective at reducing postoperative pain and opioid consumption, but femoral nerve blocks are associated with quadriceps weakness. Use of a continuous compared to single shot adductor canal block can improve postoperative analgesia. No difference was noted between an adductor canal block or PAI regarding postoperative pain and opioid consumption, but the combination of both may be more effective.
CONCLUSION
Single shot adductor canal block or PAI should be used to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption following TKA. Use of a continuous adductor canal block or a combination of single shot adductor canal block and PAI may improve postoperative analgesia in patients with concern of poor postoperative pain control.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthetics; Anesthetics, Local; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Femoral Nerve; Humans; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 36162923
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2022.03.078 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jan 2022Inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) block injections are commonly used in clinical practice, but they are not free from complications. The aim of the present systematic review... (Review)
Review
Inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) block injections are commonly used in clinical practice, but they are not free from complications. The aim of the present systematic review is to assess the nerve-related adverse effects of IAN block anesthesia. A structured and systematic search was performed on the major electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL) for studies published in English until 30 September 2021. A total of 131 articles were identified through database searching using combinations of keywords. Fifteen papers were included and assessed for eligibility. Overall, nerve damage following an IAN block anesthesia injection is a rare occurrence, probably due to the direct nerve trauma of the needle, a neurotoxic effect of the used anesthetic solution and/or a combination of them. From a medico-legal point of view, a balanced discussion prior to nerve block anesthesia should be pursued in order to avoid patients' reluctance to undergo necessary dental treatment due to the remote eventuality of nerve injury.
Topics: Anesthetics, Local; Humans; Injections; Mandible; Mandibular Nerve; Nerve Block
PubMed: 35162650
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19031627 -
Pharmacogenomics Jul 2022This systematic review aimed to outline the outcome of () variants on the effects of anesthetic and analgesic agents used in various procedures. Literature was... (Review)
Review
This systematic review aimed to outline the outcome of () variants on the effects of anesthetic and analgesic agents used in various procedures. Literature was obtained from reliable, established databases and reference tracking. Efficacy and side/adverse effects of anesthetic and analgesic drugs intraoperatively or within 48 h postsurgery were the key outcome measures for all populations. Animal studies were excluded. Twenty-nine studies were chosen for inclusion. In association with the efficacy and safety of anesthetic and analgesic agents, gene polymorphism in displayed a strong correlation in reduced analgesic effect and protection against adverse reactions. This systematic review summarized the correlation between genetic polymorphism in the gene and anesthetic/analgesic effects.
Topics: Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthetics; Animals; Polymorphism, Genetic; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Receptors, Opioid, mu
PubMed: 35735174
DOI: 10.2217/pgs-2022-0042 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Sep 2023Suggested anaesthetic dose ranges do not differ by sex, likely because of limited studies comparing sexes. Our objective was to systematically synthesise studies with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Suggested anaesthetic dose ranges do not differ by sex, likely because of limited studies comparing sexes. Our objective was to systematically synthesise studies with outcomes of unintended anaesthesia awareness under anaesthesia, intraoperative connected consciousness, time to emergence from anaesthesia, and dosing to achieve adequate depth of anaesthesia, and to compare between females and males.
METHODS
Studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library databases until August 2, 2022. Controlled clinical trials (randomised/non-randomised) and prospective cohort studies that reported outcomes by sex were included. Results were synthesised by random effects meta-analysis where possible, or narrative form.
RESULTS
Of the 19 749 studies identified, 64 (98 243 participants; 53 143 females and 45 100 males) were eligible for inclusion, and 44 citations contributed to meta-analysis. Females had a higher incidence of awareness with postoperative recall (33 studies, odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.75) and connected consciousness during anaesthesia (three studies, OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.04-4.23) than males. Time to emergence was faster in females, including time to eye-opening (10 studies, mean difference -2.28 min, 95% CI -3.58 to -0.98), and time to response to command (six studies, mean difference -2.84 min, 95% CI -4.07 to -1.62). Data on depth of anaesthesia were heterogenous, limiting synthesis to a qualitative review which did not identify sex differences.
CONCLUSIONS
Female sex was associated with a greater incidence of awareness under general anaesthesia, and faster emergence from anaesthesia. These data suggest reappraisal of anaesthetic care, including whether similar drug dosing for females and males represents best care.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42022336087.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Prospective Studies; Anesthetics; Anesthesia, General; Anesthesiology
PubMed: 37453840
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.06.042 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2023Despite potential analgesic benefits from topical ophthalmic amides and esters, their outpatient use has become of concern because of the potential for abuse and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Despite potential analgesic benefits from topical ophthalmic amides and esters, their outpatient use has become of concern because of the potential for abuse and ophthalmic complications.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of topical ophthalmic anesthetics compared with placebo or other treatments in persons with corneal abrasions.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; Embase.com; Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences (LILACS); ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), without restriction on language or year of publication. The search was performed on 10 February 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of topical ophthalmic anesthetics alone or in combination with another treatment (e.g. nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)) versus a non-anesthetic control group (e.g. placebo, non-treatment, or alternative treatment). We included trials that enrolled participants of all ages who had corneal abrasions within 48 hours of presentation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine parallel-group RCTs with a total of 556 participants (median number of participants per study: 45, interquartile range (IQR) 44 to 74), conducted in eight countries: Australia, Canada, France, South Korea, Turkey, New Zealand, UK, and USA. Study characteristics and risk of bias Four RCTs (314 participants) investigated post-traumatic corneal abrasions diagnosed in the emergency department setting. Five trials described 242 participants from ophthalmology surgery centers with post-surgical corneal defects: four from photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and one from pterygium surgery. Study duration ranged from two days to six months, the most common being one week (four RCTs). Treatment duration ranged from three hours to one week (nine RCTs); the majority were between 24 and 48 hours (five RCTs). The age of participants was reported in eight studies, ranging from 17 to 74 years of age. Only one participant in one trial was under 18 years of age. Of four studies that reported funding sources, none was industry-sponsored. We judged a high risk of bias in one trial with respect to the outcome pain control by 48 hours, and in five of seven trials with respect to the outcome complications at the furthest time point. The domain for which we assessed studies to be at the highest risk of bias was missing or selective reporting of outcome data. Findings The treatments investigated included topical anesthetics compared with placebo, topical anesthetic compared with NSAID (post-surgical cases), and topical anesthetics plus NSAID compared with placebo (post-surgical cases). Pain control by 24 hours In all studies, self-reported pain outcomes were on a 10-point scale, where lower numbers represent less pain. In post-surgical trials, topical anesthetics provided a moderate reduction in self-reported pain at 24 hours compared with placebo of 1.28 points on a 10-point scale (mean difference (MD) -1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.76 to -0.80; 3 RCTs, 119 participants). In the post-trauma participants, there may be little or no difference in effect (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.02; 1 RCT, 76 participants). Compared with NSAID in post-surgical participants, topical anesthetics resulted in a slight increase in pain at 24 hours (MD 0.82, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.63; 1 RCT, 74 participants). One RCT compared topical anesthetics plus NSAID to placebo. There may be a large reduction in pain at 24 hours with topical anesthetics plus NSAID in post-surgical participants, but the evidence to support this large effect is very uncertain (MD -5.72, 95% CI -7.35 to -4.09; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pain control by 48 hours Compared with placebo, topical anesthetics reduced post-trauma pain substantially by 48 hours (MD -5.68, 95% CI -6.38 to -4.98; 1 RCT, 111 participants) but had little to no effect on post-surgical pain (MD 0.41, 95% CI -0.45 to 1.27; 1 RCT, 44 participants), although the evidence is very uncertain. Pain control by 72 hours One post-surgical RCT showed little or no effect of topical anesthetics compared with placebo by 72 hours (MD 0.49, 95% CI -0.06 to 1.04; 44 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Proportion of participants with unresolved epithelial defects When compared with placebo or NSAID, topical anesthetics increased the number of participants without complete resolution of defects in trials of post-trauma participants (risk ratio (RR) 1.37, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.42; 3 RCTs, 221 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The proportion of placebo-treated post-surgical participants with unresolved epithelial defects at 24 to 72 hours was lower when compared with those assigned to topical anesthetics (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.55; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or topical anesthetics plus NSAID (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.85; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Proportion of participants with complications at the longest follow-up When compared with placebo or NSAID, topical anesthetics resulted in a higher proportion of post-trauma participants with complications at up to two weeks (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.23 to 5.46; 3 RCTs, 242 participants) and post-surgical participants with complications at up to one week (RR 7.00, 95% CI 0.38 to 128.02; 1 RCT, 44 participants). When topical anesthetic plus NSAID was compared with placebo, no complications were reported in either treatment arm up to one week post-surgery (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.12; 1 RCT, 30 participants). The evidence is very uncertain for safety outcomes. Quality of life None of the included trials assessed quality of life outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite topical anesthetics providing excellent pain control in the intraoperative setting, the currently available evidence provides little or no certainty about their efficacy for reducing ocular pain in the initial 24 to 72 hours after a corneal abrasion, whether from unintentional trauma or surgery. We have very low confidence in this evidence as a basis to recommend topical anesthetics as an efficacious treatment modality to relieve pain from corneal abrasions. We also found no evidence of a substantial effect on epithelial healing up to 72 hours or a reduction in ocular complications when we compared anesthetics alone or with NSAIDs versus placebo.
Topics: Humans; Adolescent; Young Adult; Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Anesthetics, Local; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Analgesics; Corneal Injuries; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 37555621
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015091.pub2 -
Handchirurgie, Mikrochirurgie,... Aug 2021Liposuctions are among the most frequently performed operations in plastic surgery worldwide. They are offered as inpatient as well as outpatient procedures. In the...
BACKGROUND
Liposuctions are among the most frequently performed operations in plastic surgery worldwide. They are offered as inpatient as well as outpatient procedures. In the outpatient setting, tumescent anaesthesia is used in various forms. There is ambiguity about the amount of lipoaspirate that can be removed safely in an outpatient setting, and also about the monitoring of parameters and the duration of postoperative care.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted with the help of the MEDLINE data base of the U. S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) and the bibliographic search engine Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com) of Google LLC. The key words "Liposuction Anesthesia" and "Liposuction Guidelines" were used. All items resulting from the search were checked for thematic concordance and further analysed by their level of evidence, significance and availability.
RESULTS
After the literature review, a total of 197 items were identified for further analysis. The analysis of the international and German literature yielded a systematic overview of recommendations.
CONCLUSIONS
Tumescence anaesthesia in an outpatient setting has various advantages, e. g. cost reduction for provider and patient as well as avoidance of the risk profile of general anaesthesia. Also patients can change their position autonomously, which can be beneficial for surgery. However, there are limitations in terms of the lipoaspirate volume that can be removed safely. With increasing lipoaspirate volumes, more local anaesthetic is needed, which also increases the postoperative monitoring time. In the authors view, tumescent anaesthesia should only be used for small-volume and localised liposuctions. Liposuction in general anaesthesia offers more advantages, especially with increasing lipoaspirate volumes.
Topics: Anesthesia, General; Anesthesia, Local; Anesthetics, Local; Humans; Lipectomy; United States
PubMed: 33525036
DOI: 10.1055/a-1333-2696 -
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia =... Mar 2023In labour, neuraxial analgesia is the standard in the provision of pain relief. However, the optimal mode of delivering epidural solution has not been determined, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
In labour, neuraxial analgesia is the standard in the provision of pain relief. However, the optimal mode of delivering epidural solution has not been determined, and some parturients may need an alternative to epidural analgesia. We sought to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare continuous epidural infusion (CEI), programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB), computer-integrated CEI, computer-integrated PIEB, patient-controlled epidural bolus (PCEA), fentanyl patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), and remifentanil PCA, either alone or in combination.
METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, CINAHL, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials that included nulliparous and/or multiparous parturients in spontaneous or induced labour. The maintenance epidural solution had to include a low concentration local anesthetic and an opioid. Specific subgroups in the obstetric population such as preeclampsia were excluded. Network meta-analysis was performed with a frequentist method, and continuous and dichotomous outcomes are presented as mean differences and odds ratios, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
Overall, 73 trials were included. For the first coprimary outcome, the need for rescue analgesia, CEI was inferior to PIEB and PIEB + PCEA was superior to PCEA alone, with a low certainty of evidence given the presence of serious limitations and imprecision. The second coprimary outcome, the maternal satisfaction, was improved by PIEB + PCEA compared with CEI + PCEA and PCEA alone, with a low quality of evidence in view of the presence of serious limitations and imprecision. Fentanyl PCA increased the requirement for rescue analgesia and decreased maternal satisfaction relative to many methods of delivering epidural solution. In terms of secondary outcomes, PIEB increased analgesic efficacy compared with CEI, and PCEA reduced local anesthetic consumption at the expense of inferior analgesia relative to CEI and PIEB. PIEB + PCEA was superior to CEI + PCEA in regard to the pain score at 2 h and 4 h, consumption of local anesthetic, incidence of lower lower limb motor blockade and the rate of spontaneous vaginal delivery. Fentanyl and remifentanil PCA did not provide the same level of analgesia as all epidural methods, resulted in increasing analgesic ineffectiveness with time spent in labour, and predisposed to a higher incidence of side effects such as nausea and/or vomiting and sedation. Remifentanil PCA was superior to fentanyl PCA for analgesia at an early time point, and it increased the incidence of oxygen desaturation relative to other strategies of delivering epidural solution.
CONCLUSIONS
Opioid PCA did not provide the same level of analgesia as epidural methods with a higher incidence of side effects. We interpret the findings of our systematic review and network meta-analysis as suggesting PIEB + PCEA to be the optimal delivery mode of epidural solution. Nevertheless, the potential differing importance of the various maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes in determining which is optimal has not, to our knowledge, been elucidated yet.
STUDY REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42021254978); registered 27 May 2021.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Analgesia, Patient-Controlled; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthetics, Local; Fentanyl; Network Meta-Analysis; Pain; Remifentanil
PubMed: 36720838
DOI: 10.1007/s12630-022-02389-9 -
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