-
Actas Urologicas Espanolas 2024To identify the latest advances in suction devices and evaluate their effect in Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and ureteroscopy for stones. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To identify the latest advances in suction devices and evaluate their effect in Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and ureteroscopy for stones.
BASIC PROCEDURES
A systematic literature search was performed on 4th January 2023 using Scopus, PubMed, and EMBASE. Only English papers were included; both pediatric and adult studies were accepted. Duplicate studies, case reports, letters to the editor, and meeting abstracts were excluded.
MAIN FINDINGS
Twenty-one papers were selected. Several methods have been proposed for suction use in RIRS, such as through the ureteral access sheath or directly to the scope. Artificial intelligence can also regulate this system, monitoring pressure and perfusion flow values. All the proposed techniques showed satisfactory perioperative results for operative time, stone-free rate (SFR), and residual fragments. Moreover, the reduction of intrarenal pressure (induced by aspiration) was also associated with a lower infection rate. Even the studies that considered kidney stones with a diameter of 20 mm or higher reported higher SFR and reduced postoperative complications. However, the lack of well-defined settings for suction pressure and fluid flow prevents the standardization of the procedure.
CONCLUSION
Aspiration device in the surgical treatment of urinary stones favours a higher SFR, reducing infectious complications, as supported by the included studies. RIRS with a suction system provided to be a natural successor to the traditional technique, regulating intrarenal pressure and aspirating fine dust.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Artificial Intelligence; Suction; Treatment Outcome; Kidney Calculi; Ureter
PubMed: 37302691
DOI: 10.1016/j.acuroe.2023.06.001 -
American Journal of Obstetrics &... Mar 2024Cesarean scar pregnancy may lead to varying degrees of complications. There are many treatment methods for it, but there are no unified or recognized treatment... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Cesarean scar pregnancy may lead to varying degrees of complications. There are many treatment methods for it, but there are no unified or recognized treatment strategies. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to observe the efficacy and safety of treatment modalities for patients with cesarean scar pregnancy.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from their inception to January 31, 2024. In addition, relevant reviews and meta-analyses were manually searched for additional references.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Our study incorporated head-to-head trials involving a minimum of 10 women diagnosed with cesarean scar pregnancy through ultrasound imaging or magnetic resonance imaging, encompassing a detailed depiction of primary interventions and any supplementary measures. Trials with a Newcastle-Ottawa scale score <4 were excluded because of their low quality.
METHODS
We conducted a random-effects network meta-analysis and review for cesarean scar pregnancy. Group-level data on treatment efficacy and safety, reproductive outcomes, study design, and demographic characteristics were extracted following a predefined protocol. The quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle‒Ottawa scale for cohort studies and case series. The main outcomes were efficacy (initial treatment success) and safety (complications), of which summary odds ratios and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.
RESULTS
Seventy-three trials (7 randomized controlled trials) assessing a total of 8369 women and 17 treatment modalities were included. Network meta-analyses were rooted in data from 73 trials that reported success rates and 55 trials that reported complications. The findings indicate that laparoscopy, transvaginal resection, hysteroscopic curettage, and high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage demonstrated the highest cure rates, as evidenced by surface under the cumulative ranking curve rankings of 91.2, 88.2, 86.9, and 75.3, respectively. When compared with suction curettage, the odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for efficacy were as follows: 6.76 (1.99-23.01) for laparoscopy, 5.92 (1.47-23.78) for transvaginal resection, 5.00 (1.99-23.78) for hysteroscopic curettage, and 3.27 (1.08-9.89) for high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage. Complications were more likely to occur after receiving uterine artery chemoembolization, suction curettage, methotrexate+hysteroscopic curettage, and systemic methotrexate; hysteroscopic curettage, high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage, and Lap were safer than the other options derived from finite evidence; and the confidence intervals of all the data were wide.
CONCLUSION
Our findings indicate that laparoscopy, transvaginal resection, hysteroscopic curettage, and high-intensity focused ultrasound combined with suction curettage procedures exhibit superior efficacy with reduced complications. The utilization of methotrexate (both locally guided injection and systemic administration) as a standalone medical treatment is not recommended.
PubMed: 38485053
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101328 -
Dermatologic Therapy Jan 2022Hyperhidrosis impairs quality of life (QOL) in hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) patients and may exacerbate HS. However, there is limited literature on whether... (Review)
Review
Hyperhidrosis impairs quality of life (QOL) in hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) patients and may exacerbate HS. However, there is limited literature on whether hyperhidrosis treatments improve HS disease. To systematically review literature on efficacy and tolerability of hyperhidrosis treatments in HS patients. In May 2021, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were systematically searched by two reviewers per PRISMA guidelines for articles on hyperhidrosis and HS. Sixteen articles met inclusion criteria (2 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], one case-control study, three cross-sectional studies, 10 case-studies/series), encompassing 252 HS patients across studies. They examined botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) (n = 6) and B (BTX-B) (n = 1), suction-curettage (n = 1), diode laser (n = 1), and microwave-based energy device (MED) (n = 3). Overall, BTX treatments improve HS severity, QOL, hyperhidrosis, and were well-tolerated. Suction-curettage did not improve disease. One HS patient tolerated diode laser well, with improvement in sweating and HS. One RCT studying MED was discontinued due to adverse events. Two studies reported MED-induced HS. BTX was overall helpful in HS patients, including in patients without concomitant hyperhidrosis. However, more prospective studies are needed to examine its utility in HS. There is potential harm of MEDs in HS. Most studies examining hyperhidrosis treatments in HS patients are low level of evidence. Larger RCTs should examine the efficacy and tolerability of hyperhidrosis treatments in HS.
Topics: Botulinum Toxins, Type A; Case-Control Studies; Hidradenitis Suppurativa; Humans; Hyperhidrosis; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34796606
DOI: 10.1111/dth.15210 -
Resuscitation Plus Dec 2022Upper airway suctioning at birth was considered standard procedure and is still commonly practiced. Negative effects could exceed benefits of suction. (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Upper airway suctioning at birth was considered standard procedure and is still commonly practiced. Negative effects could exceed benefits of suction.
QUESTION
In infants born through clear amniotic fluid (P) does suctioning of the mouth and nose (I) vs no suctioning (C) improve outcomes (O).
DATA SOURCES
Information specialist conducted literature search (12th September 2021, re-run 17th June 2022) using Medline, Embase, Cochrane Databases, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and CINAHL. RCTs, non-RCTs and observational studies with a defined selection strategy were included. Unpublished studies, reviews, editorials, animal and manikin studies were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two authors independently extracted data, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane ROB2 and ROBINS-I tools. Certainty of evidence was assed using the GRADE framework. Review Manager was used to analyse data and GRADEPro to develop summary of evidence tables. Meta-analyses were performed if ≥2 RCTs were available.
OUTCOMES
Primary: assisted ventilation. Secondary: advanced resuscitation, oxygen supplementation, adverse effects of suctioning, unanticipated NICU admission.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs (n = 1096) and 2 observational studies (n = 418) were identified. Two RCTs (n = 280) with data concerns were excluded post-hoc. Meta-analysis of 3 RCTs, (n = 702) showed no difference in primary outcome. Two RCTs (n = 200) and 2 prospective observational studies (n = 418) found lower oxygen saturations in first 10 minutes of life with suctioning. Two RCTs (n = 200) showed suctioned newborns took longer to achieve target saturations.
LIMITATIONS
Certainty of evidence was low or very low for all outcomes. Most studies selected healthy newborns limiting generalisability and insufficient data was available for planned subgroup analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite low certainty evidence, this review suggests no clinical benefit from suctioning clear amniotic fluid from infants following birth, with some evidence suggesting a resulting desaturation. These finding support current guideline recommendations that this practice is not used as a routine step in birth.
FUNDING
The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation provided access to software platforms, an information specialist and teleconferencing.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
This systematic review was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) (identifier: CRD42021286258).
PubMed: 36157918
DOI: 10.1016/j.resplu.2022.100298 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2020Non-tubal ectopic pregnancy is the implantation of an embryo at a site lying outside the uterine cavity or fallopian tubes. Sites include a caesarean scar, the cornua... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Non-tubal ectopic pregnancy is the implantation of an embryo at a site lying outside the uterine cavity or fallopian tubes. Sites include a caesarean scar, the cornua uteri, the ovary, the cervix, and the abdomen. There has been an increasing trend in the occurrence of these rare conditions, especially caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of surgery, medical treatment, and expectant management of non-tubal ectopic pregnancy in terms of fertility outcomes and complications.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group Specialised Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) search portal and nine other databases to 12 December 2019. We handsearched reference lists of articles retrieved and contacted experts in the field to obtain additional data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in all languages that examined the effects and safety of surgery, medical treatment, and expectant management of non-tubal ectopic pregnancy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used Cochrane standard methodological procedures. Primary outcomes were treatment success and complications.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five RCTs with 303 women, all reporting Caesarean scar pregnancy. Two compared uterine arterial embolization (UAE) or uterine arterial chemoembolization (UACE) plus methotrexate (MTX) versus systemic MTX and subsequent dilation and suction curettage; one compared UACE plus MTX versus ultrasonography-guided local MTX injection; and two compared suction curettage under hysteroscopy versus suction curettage under ultrasonography after UAE/UACE. The quality of evidence ranged from moderate to very low. The main limitations were imprecision (small sample sizes and very wide confidence intervals (CI) for most analyses), multiple comparisons with a small number of trials, and insufficient data available to assess heterogeneity. UAE/UACE versus systemic MTX prior to suction curettage Two studies reported this comparison. One compared UAE with systemic MTX and one compared UACE plus MTX versus systemic MTX, in both cases followed by a suction curettage. We are uncertain whether UAE/UACE improved success rates after initial treatment (UAE: risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.12; 1 RCT, 72 women; low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.38; 1 RCT, 28 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether UAE/UACE reduced rates of complications (UAE: RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.75; 1 RCT, 72 women; low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.48; 1 RCT, 28 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether UAE/UACE reduced adverse effects (UAE: RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.41 to 6.11; 1 RCT, 72 women; low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.24; 1 RCT, 28 women; low-quality evidence), and it was not obvious that the types of events had similar values to participants (e.g. fever versus vomiting). Blood loss was lower in UAE/UACE groups than systemic MTX groups (UAE: mean difference (MD) -378.70 mL, 95% CI -401.43 to -355.97; 1 RCT, 72 women; moderate-quality evidence; UACE: MD -879.00 mL, 95% CI -1135.23 to -622.77; 1 RCT, 28 women; moderate-quality evidence). Data were not available on time to normalize β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG). UACE plus MTX versus ultrasonography-guided local MTX injection We are uncertain whether UACE improved success rates after initial treatment (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.60; 1 RCT, 45 women; very low-quality evidence). Adverse effects: the study reported the same number of failed treatments in each arm (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.92; 1 RCT, 45 women). We are uncertain whether UACE shortened the time to normalize β-hCG (MD 1.50 days, 95% CI -3.16 to 6.16; 1 RCT, 45 women; very low-quality evidence). Data were not available for complications. Suction curettage under hysteroscopy versus under ultrasonography after UAE/UACE. Two studies reported this comparison. One compared suction curettage under hysteroscopy versus under ultrasonography after UAE, and one compared these interventions after UACE. We are uncertain whether suction curettage under hysteroscopy improved success rates after initial treatment (UAE: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.03; 1 RCT, 66 women; very low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.09; 1 RCT, 92 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether suction curettage under hysteroscopy reduced rates of complications (UAE: RR 4.00, 95% CI 0.47 to 33.91; 1 RCT, 66 women; very low-quality evidence; UACE: RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.72; 1 RCT, 92 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether suction curettage under hysteroscopy reduced adverse effects (UAE: RR 3.09, 95% CI 0.12 to 78.70; 1 RCT, 66 women; very low-quality evidence; UACE: not estimable; 1 RCT, 92 women; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether suction curettage under hysteroscopy shortened the time to normalize β-hCG (UAE: MD 4.03 days, 95% CI -1.79 to 9.85; 1 RCT, 66 women; very low-quality evidence; UACE: MD 0.84 days, 95% CI -1.90 to 3.58; 1 RCT, 92 women; low-quality evidence). Non-tubal ectopic pregnancy other than CSP No studies reported on non-tubal ectopic pregnancies in locations other than on a caesarean scar.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For Caesarean scar pregnancies (CSP) it is uncertain whether there is a difference in success rates, complications, or adverse events between UAE/UACE and administration of systemic MTX before suction curettage (low-quality evidence). Blood loss was lower if suction curettage is conducted after UAE/UACE than after administration of systemic MTX (moderate-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether there is a difference in treatment success rates, complications, adverse effects or time to normalize β-hCG between suction curettage under hysteroscopy and under ultrasonography (very low-quality evidence). There are no studies of non-tubal ectopic pregnancy other than CSP and RCTs for these types of pregnancy are unlikely.
Topics: Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal; Bias; Cesarean Section; Chemoembolization, Therapeutic; Cicatrix; Confidence Intervals; Dilatation and Curettage; Female; Humans; Hysteroscopy; Methotrexate; Pregnancy; Pregnancy, Ectopic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sample Size; Ultrasonography, Interventional; Uterine Artery; Uterine Artery Embolization; Vacuum Curettage
PubMed: 32609376
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011174.pub2 -
BMJ Open Jul 2023To compare the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) against percutaneous needle aspiration (PNA) for liver abscess. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) against percutaneous needle aspiration (PNA) for liver abscess.
DESIGN
Systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, Airiti Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from their inception up to 16 March 2022.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials that compared PCD to PNA for liver abscess were considered eligible, without restriction on language.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Primary outcome was treatment success rate. Depending on heterogeneity, either a fixed-effects model or a random-effects model was used to derive overall estimates. Review Manager V.5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. Trial sequential analysis was performed using the Trial Sequential Analysis software. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.
RESULTS
Ten trials totalling 1287 individuals were included. Pooled analysis revealed that PCD, when compared with PNA, enhanced treatment success rate (risk ratio 1.16, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.25). Trial sequential analysis demonstrated this robust finding with required information size attained. For large abscesses, subgroup analysis favoured PCD (test of subgroup difference, p<0.001). In comparison to PNA, pooled analysis indicated a significant benefit of PCD on time to achieve clinical improvement or complete clinical relief (mean differences (MD) -2.53 days; 95% CI -3.54 to -1.52) in six studies with 1000 patients; time to achieve a 50% reduction in abscess size (MD -2.49 days; 95% CI -3.59 to -1.38) in five studies with 772 patients; and duration of intravenous antibiotic use (MD -4.04 days, 95% CI -5.99 to -2.10) in four studies with 763 patients. In-hospital mortality and complications were not different.
CONCLUSION
In patients with liver abscess, ultrasound-guided PCD raises the treatment success rate by 136 in 1000 patients, improves clinical outcomes by 3 days and reduces the need for intravenous antibiotics by 4 days.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022316540.
Topics: Humans; Drainage; Suction; Liver Abscess; Biopsy, Needle; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Catheters
PubMed: 37518084
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072736 -
European Journal of Surgical Oncology :... Apr 2021Seroma is a common complication after mastectomy. The aim of this review is to elucidate whether closed suction drainage can safely be omitted in patients undergoing...
BACKGROUND
Seroma is a common complication after mastectomy. The aim of this review is to elucidate whether closed suction drainage can safely be omitted in patients undergoing mastectomy when assessing seroma formation and its complications. The second aim is to assess the influence of flap fixation on seroma related complications, as there is existing evidence showing that combining mastectomy with flap fixation may make the use of drainage systems obsolete.
SEARCH & SELECTION
A review of the literature was performed and articles that compared mastectomy with drainage and mastectomy without drainage were selected. Due to the small number of eligible studies, no selection based on whether flap fixation was performed was possible. If outcome was described in terms of seroma formation or seroma related complications, papers were eligible for inclusion. Studies older than 20 years, animal studies, studies not written in English and studies with male patients were excluded.
RESULTS
A total of eight articles were eligible for inclusion. Four prospective studies and four retrospective studies were included. In four studies, flap fixation was performed. Frequency of seroma formation as well as seroma that required intervention was reported. The included studies demonstrated that omitting closed suction drainage does not lead to a higher incidence of seroma formation in patients undergoing mastectomy.
CONCLUSION
Despite substantial heterogeneity, there is evidence that drainage can safely be omitted without exacerbating seroma formation and its complications. A well-powered, randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect of drainage omission on seroma formation, with or without flap fixation, is needed.
Topics: Axilla; Breast Neoplasms; Drainage; Female; Humans; Lymph Node Excision; Mastectomy; Postoperative Complications; Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy; Seroma; Surgical Flaps; Surgical Wound Infection; Sutures
PubMed: 33051116
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.10.010 -
Iranian Journal of Public Health Aug 2020It is of paramount importance to reduce the probability of clinical risks to improve the quality of health care services, make the relationship between service providers... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
It is of paramount importance to reduce the probability of clinical risks to improve the quality of health care services, make the relationship between service providers and patients more effective, enhance patient satisfaction, and decrease the rate of complaints regarding medical errors in hospitals. This study aimed at detecting potential and unacceptable risks occurring in the hospital ICUs.
METHODS
In this systematic review, all studies examining the risk assessment of ICUs in hospitals using Failure Mode and Effect Analysis method were reviewed. Google scholar, PubMed, Scopus, SID, Magiran and Web of Science databases were searched to find relevant articles published from 1980 to 2019.
RESULTS
The most frequent failures detected in the reviewed articles consisted of high risk of infection inwards for medical and nursing operations, high infection rates inwards for medical devices' operation within the unit, and early discharge. Moreover, the processes through which potential high-risk Failures were examined in these studies were injection or prescription process, suction process, the process of inserting or removing endotracheal tubes, the process of transferring patients from the operation room to the unit or vice versa, pressure ulcers, and processes related to the medical devices' operation.
CONCLUSION
There are many possible reasons for failure occurring throughout these processes, and the failure modes occurring in these processes are more probable to cause serious damages to patients, have high repeatability with low probability of failure detection as the failures cannot be discovered by the personnel.
PubMed: 33083318
DOI: 10.18502/ijph.v49i8.3865 -
Cardiology 2022Heart failure (HF) is a severe and terminal stage of various heart diseases. Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are relatively mature and have contributed to the...
INTRODUCTION
Heart failure (HF) is a severe and terminal stage of various heart diseases. Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are relatively mature and have contributed to the treatment of end-stage HF. Ventricular arrhythmia (VA) is a common complication after LVAD implantation, including ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation, both of which may cause abnormal circulation.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted in the PubMed database, "Ventricular Arrhythmia" OR "VA" OR "Arrhythmia" OR "Ventricular Tachycardia," OR "Ventricular Fibrillation" AND "LVAD" OR "Left Ventricular Assist Device" OR "Heart Assist Device" as either keywords or MeSH terms, the authors screened the titles and abstracts of the articles. Eventually, 12 original research articles were retrieved.
RESULTS
The 0.83 [95% CI: 0.77, 0.89] of patients were male. A whole of 53% [95% CI: 0.25, 0.81] of VA patients had a history of atrial fibrillation and 61% [95% CI: 0.52, 0.69] had a history of VA. 39% [95% CI: 0.29, 0.49] of the participants had no prior history of VA and experienced new VA following CF-LVAD implantation. Following CF-LVAD implantation, 59% [95% CI: 0.51, 0.67] of patients developed early VA (VA ≤30 days). The 30-day mortality rate of patients was 4% [95% CI: 0.01, 0.07]. And overall mortality was 28% [95% CI: 0.15, 0.41]. The reported incidence of VA after LVAD implantation is not identical in different medical centers and ranges from 20% to 60%. The mechanism of VA after LVAD implantation is summarized as primary cardiomyopathy-related, device mechanical stimulation, myocardial scarring, ventricular displacement, electrolyte regulation, and other processes.
CONCLUSIONS
A preoperative VA history is considered a predictor of VA following LVAD implantation in most studies. Multiple mechanisms and factors, such as prevention of "suction events," ablation, and implantable cardioverter defibrillator, should be considered for the prevention and treatment of postoperative VA in patients requiring long-term VAD treatment. This study provides a reference for the clinical application of LAVD and the prevention of postoperative VA after LVAD implantation. Future multicenter prospective studies with uniform patient follow-up are needed to screen for additional potential risk factors and predictors. These studies will help to define the incidence rate of VA after LAVD implantation. As a result, we provide guidance for the selection of preventive intervention.
Topics: Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Female; Heart Failure; Heart-Assist Devices; Humans; Male; Risk Factors; Tachycardia, Ventricular; Treatment Outcome; Ventricular Fibrillation
PubMed: 35483328
DOI: 10.1159/000524779 -
Respiratory Care Mar 2023Several studies have investigated postextubation complications of the positive-pressure and suctioning techniques; however, these studies yielded inconsistent results.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Several studies have investigated postextubation complications of the positive-pressure and suctioning techniques; however, these studies yielded inconsistent results. Therefore, in this systematic review, we aimed to assess and compare the risk of complications between these techniques after extubation.
METHODS
This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021272068). We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) or observational studies that compared positive-pressure and suctioning extubation techniques in medical literature databases. Our search was conducted from the databases' inception to July 7, 2022. The included studies were assessed for quality by using a risk of bias tool.
RESULTS
Six RCTs and 1 non-randomized controlled study were included in this systematic review ( 1,575 subjects), wherein the positive-pressure and suctioning techniques were applied to 762 and 813 subjects, respectively. Three studies were conducted in operating rooms, and 4 studies were conducted in ICUs. Five studies were conducted among adults, and 2 studies were conducted among children or neonates. All the studies except 1 RCT showed that the positive-pressure technique tended to have a lower but not statistically different risk of complications, including desaturation, airway obstruction, pneumonia, aspiration, atelectasis, and re-intubation, than the suctioning technique. Three of the 6 RCTs were determined to have a high risk of bias and the 1 non-randomized controlled study was determined to have a serious risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
The positive-pressure technique tended to have a lower risk of complications than the suctioning technique. Further high-quality studies are warranted.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Airway Obstruction; Intensive Care Units; Intubation, Intratracheal; Suction; Airway Extubation; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36828583
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.10326