-
Neonatology 2022Pain management is important for newborns' immediate and long-term well-being. While intranasal analgesia and sedation have been well studied in children, their use...
AIM
Pain management is important for newborns' immediate and long-term well-being. While intranasal analgesia and sedation have been well studied in children, their use could be extended to term and preterm infants. This systematic review aims to assess the use of intranasal medications for procedural analgesia or sedation in the neonatal intensive care unit.
METHODS
MEDLINE via Ovid, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched independently by two reviewers for clinical studies on sedation or analgesia given intranasally.
RESULTS
Seven studies, with 401 patients, were included. The studies described various molecules (midazolam, fentanyl, ketamine, or dexmedetomidine) for different procedures such as intubation in the delivery room, screening for retinopathy, or magnetic resonance imaging. All studies reported significant reduction in pain and sedation markers (based on clinical scales, skin conductance, and clinical variables such as heart rate and crying time). Adverse effects were uncommon and mostly consisted in desaturation, apnoea, hypotension, or paradoxical reactions.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The intranasal route seems a potential alternative for procedural pain management and sedation in neonates, especially when intravenous access is not available. However, data about safety remain limited. Reported sides effects could be attributed to molecules used rather than the intranasal route. Optimal drugs and doses still need to be characterized. Further studies are needed to ensure safety before promoting a widespread use of intranasal medications in neonatology.
Topics: Child; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal
PubMed: 35231912
DOI: 10.1159/000521949 -
Annals of Surgery Dec 2020To assess and quantify the effect of perioperative music on medication requirement, length of stay and costs in adult surgical patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess and quantify the effect of perioperative music on medication requirement, length of stay and costs in adult surgical patients.
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA
There is an increasing interest in nonpharmacological interventions to decrease opioid analgesics use, as they have significant adverse effects and opioid prescription rates have reached epidemic proportions. Previous studies have reported beneficial outcomes of perioperative music.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of 8 databases was performed from inception date to January 7, 2019. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of perioperative music on medication requirement, length of stay or costs in adult surgical patients were eligible. Meta-analysis was performed using random effect models, pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018093140) and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded 2414 articles, 55 studies (N = 4968 patients) were included. Perioperative music significantly reduced postoperative opioid requirement (pooled SMD -0.31 [95% CI -0.45 to -0.16], P < 0.001, I = 44.3, N = 1398). Perioperative music also significantly reduced intraoperative propofol (pooled SMD -0.72 [95% CI -1.01 to -0.43], P < 0.00001, I = 61.1, N = 554) and midazolam requirement (pooled SMD -1.07 [95% CI -1.70 to -0.44], P < 0.001, I = 73.1, N = 184), while achieving the same sedation level. No significant reduction in length of stay (pooled SMD -0.18 [95% CI -0.43 to 0.067], P = 0.15, I = 56.0, N = 600) was observed.
CONCLUSIONS
Perioperative music can reduce opioid and sedative medication requirement, potentially improving patient outcome and reducing medical costs as higher opioid dosage is associated with an increased risk of adverse events and chronic opioid abuse.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Length of Stay; Music Therapy; Pain, Postoperative; Perioperative Period; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31356272
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003506 -
Cureus Oct 2019Objective The aim of this study was to assess the ability of drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) to change therapeutic decisions through the identification of...
Objective The aim of this study was to assess the ability of drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) to change therapeutic decisions through the identification of obstruction sites in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Materials and methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted concerning studies that reported the impact of DISE on therapeutic recommendations. The percentage of change was collected for each study and per site of the collapse. The pooled rate of change and the respective 95% confidence interval (CI) were computed. Subgroup analysis was performed based on patients' age, sample size, the applied DISE protocol, and the originally used diagnostic modality before DISE. Results In a total of nine studies, 1247 patients were included (69.2% males, 59.7% children, 78.04% with a multilevel collapse). Therapeutic decisions changed in 43.69% of patients (CI, 33.84 to 53.54). The change rates were significantly higher in adults (54.0% versus 25.9% in children, P = 0.001), midazolam-based DISE protocols (78.4% versus 48.45% for midazolam plus propofol and 33.9% for propofol, < 0.001), and after awake endoscopy (62.2% as compared to 44.6% after clinical basic examination [CBE], 40.1% after CBE, lateral cephalometry, and Müller maneuver, = 0.02). Changes at uvular and palatal sites were more frequent in adults and at the tonsils in children. Conclusion The DISE approach can be promoted via implementing unified classification systems of obstruction sites; the widescale application of target-controlled infusion and its therapeutic benefits can be explored in well-designed randomized studies that compare its efficacy with other diagnostic modalities.
PubMed: 31754592
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.6041 -
PloS One 2021Urodynamic studies in rats and mice are broadly used to examine pathomechnisms of disease and identify and test therapeutic targets. This review aims to highlight the...
Urodynamic studies in rats and mice are broadly used to examine pathomechnisms of disease and identify and test therapeutic targets. This review aims to highlight the effects of the anesthetics on the lower urinary tract function and seeks to identify protocols that allow recovery from anesthesia and repeated measurements while preserving the function which is being studied. All studies published in English language, which compared the data obtained under various types of anesthesia and the urodynamics performed in awake animals were included. It appears that urethane, an anesthetic recommended extensively for the investigation of lower urinary tract function, is appropriate for acute urodynamic studies only. Major advantages of urethane are its stability and ability to preserve the micturition reflex. Due to its toxicity and carcinogenicity, urethane anesthesia should not be used for recovery procedures. This review evaluated available alternatives including propofol, isoflurane and combinations of urethane, ketamine/xylazine, ketamine/medetomidine, and/or fentanyl/fluanisone/midazolam. Different effects have been demonstrated among these drugs on the urinary bladder, the urethral sphincter, as well as on their neuroregulation. The lowest incidence of adverse effects was observed with the use of a combination of ketamine and xylazine. Although the variations in the reviewed study protocols represent a limitation, we believe that this summary will help in standardizing and optimizing future experiments.
Topics: Anesthesia; Anesthetics; Animals; Mice; Rats; Reflex; Urinary Bladder; Urination; Urodynamics
PubMed: 34166394
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253192 -
PloS One 2023Nitrous oxide (N2O) with rapid analgesic effect is often used to relieve pain induced by diagnostic procedures. This review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Nitrous oxide (N2O) with rapid analgesic effect is often used to relieve pain induced by diagnostic procedures. This review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of N2O in patients undergoing puncture biopsy.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and the ClinicalTrials.gov up to March, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they investigated the effect of N2O in adults undergoing puncture biopsy. The primary outcome was pain score. Secondary outcomes included anxiety score, patient satisfaction and side effects.
RESULTS
Twelve RCTs with 1070 patients were included in the qualitative review, of which eleven RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis suggested that compared with the controls (placebo, lidocaine and midazolam), N2O had better analgesic effect (MD -1.12, 95% CI -2.12 to -0.13, P = 0.03; I2 = 94%). In addition, N2O significantly alleviated patient anxiety (MD = -1.79, 95% CI -2.41 to -1.18, P<0.00001; I2 = 0%) and improved patient satisfaction (MD 1.81, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.50, P = 0.04; I2 = 92%). There was no significant difference regrading the risk of nausea (RR 2.56; 95% CI 0.70 to 9.31, P = 0.15; I2 = 0%), headache (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.33, P = 0.48; I2 = 46%), dizziness (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 5.13, P = 0.27; I2 = 0%) or euphoria (RR 2.67, 95% CI 0.81 to 8.79, P = 0.11; I2 = 8%) between the N2O group and the control group.
CONCLUSION
The present review suggested that N2O might be effective for pain management in patients undergoing puncture biopsy.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Nitrous Oxide; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pain; Analgesics; Biopsy, Needle
PubMed: 37279243
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286713 -
Systematic Reviews Jul 2019The operation areas of clowns in the medical context are multifaceted. Clowning in children undergoing surgery has been shown to be able to lessen children's anxiety.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The operation areas of clowns in the medical context are multifaceted. Clowning in children undergoing surgery has been shown to be able to lessen children's anxiety. Hence, our aim was to assess the effectiveness of clowning on anxiety in children undergoing potentially anxiety-provoking procedures.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in December 2018. The primary outcome was children's anxiety. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess risk of bias of the included studies.
RESULTS
We found eleven RCTs including 733 children. Their risk of bias was relatively high. Children undergoing clowning were significantly less anxious in preoperative time compared to parental presence or no intervention (mean difference (MD) - 7.16; 95% CI - 10.58, - 3.75) and in operation, induction, or patient room (MD - 20.45; 95% CI - 35.54, - 5.37), but not during mask application or physician examination (MD 2.33; 95% CI - 4.82, 9.48). Compared with midazolam, children's anxiety was significantly lower in preoperative time (MD - 7.60; 95% CI - 11.73, - 3.47), but not in the induction room (MD - 9.63; 95% CI - 21.04, 1.77).
CONCLUSIONS
Clowning seems to lower children's anxiety, but because of the increased risk of bias of included studies and the very low quality of evidence, these results should be considered with caution.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42016039045.
Topics: Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; Anxiety; Bias; Child; Humans; Play Therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31324215
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-019-1095-4 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2021Remimazolam is a new ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine. Remimazolam has been approved for procedural sedation by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2020. However,...
Remimazolam is a new ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine. Remimazolam has been approved for procedural sedation by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2020. However, prior trials and the participants they enrolled were limited. In this meta-analysis, we investigated the effectiveness and adverse events (AEs) of remimazolam during procedural sedation. The study protocol was registered (doi: 10.37766/inplasy2020.8.0043), and six databases were searched. We performed meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis (TSA), and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology for judging the certainty of evidence (CoE). A total of five randomized controlled trials with 1,248 participants were included. Compared with the use of midazolam, the utilization of remimazolam resulted in an increase in procedure success rate [odds ratio (OR) = 9.01, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.35-34.57], a reduction in the application of rescue medication (OR = 13.58, 95% CI: 3.46-53.28), a decrease in time to recovery [minutes, weighted mean difference (WMD) = -5.70, 95% CI: -8.68 to -2.72], and a better cognitive recovery of Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (WMD = 5.22, 95% CI: 2.88-7.55). No difference was found in completion of procedure (OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 0.72-3.90) with inconclusive in TSA. Despite no difference of total AEs (OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.24-1.50), more detailed analysis of AEs remained inconclusive in TSA. The GRADE assessment demonstrated low to very low CoE. Our analysis suggested that remimazolam may be a better choice for procedural sedation than midazolam. Nevertheless, further studies are warranted to conclusively establish its safety.
PubMed: 34386505
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.641866 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2020Emergence agitation (EA) is one of the most common and intractable postoperative complications among children undergoing surgery under general anesthesia....
Effects of Dexmedetomidine on Emergence Agitation and Recovery Quality Among Children Undergoing Surgery Under General Anesthesia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Emergence agitation (EA) is one of the most common and intractable postoperative complications among children undergoing surgery under general anesthesia. Dexmedetomidine, an α(2)-adrenoceptor agonist, offers an ideal sedation, reduces preoperative anxiety, and facilitates smooth induction of anesthesia, and it is widely used in pediatric surgery. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine for preventing emergence agitation in children after general anesthesia. We comprehensively reviewed PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases to search all randomized controlled trials, published before April 22, 2020, investigating the efficacy of dexmedetomidine in preventing the emergence agitation in children after general anesthesia. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3. The primary outcome was the incidence of emergence agitation. Secondary outcomes included the number of patients requiring rescue analgesic, number of patients with postoperative nausea and vomiting, emergence time, extubation time, and time to discharge from the post-anesthesia care unit. We included a total of 33 studies, comprising 2,549 patients in this meta-analysis. Compared with saline, dexmedetomidine significantly reduced the emergence agitation incidence [risk ratio (RR) 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22-0.37; < 0.00001], incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.3-0.69; = 0.0002), and the requirement of rescue analgesic (RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.18-0.44; < 0.00001). Furthermore, children in the dexmedetomidine group experienced a longer emergence time [mean difference (MD) 2.18; 95% CI 0.81-3.56; = 0.002] and extubation time (MD 0.77; 95% CI 0.22-1.31; = 0.006) compared with those in the saline group. However, no significant difference was observed in the time to discharge from the post-anesthesia care unit (MD 2.22; 95% CI -2.29-6.74; = 0.33) between the two groups. No significant differences were observed between the effects of dexmedetomidine and other drugs like midazolam, propofol, fentanyl, tramadol, and clonidine in terms of the emergence agitation incidence and other parameters, except for the requirement of rescue analgesic (RR 0.45; 95% CI 0.33-0.61; < 0.00001). Dexmedetomidine can prevent emergence agitation, relieves postoperative pain, decreases the requirement of rescue analgesic, and decreases the postoperative nausea and vomiting events.
PubMed: 33304867
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2020.580226 -
Acute and Critical Care Feb 2024This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of ketamine in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients.
BACKGROUND
This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of ketamine in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients.
METHODS
We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library; the search was performed initially in January but was repeated in December of 2023. We focused on ICU patients of any age. We included studies that compared ketamine with other traditional agents used in the ICU. We synthesized evidence using RevMan v5.4 and presented the results as forest plots. We also used trial sequential analysis (TSA) software v. 0.9.5.10 Beta and presented results as TSA plots. For synthesizing results, we used a random-effects model and reported differences in outcomes of two groups in terms of mean difference (MD), standardized MD, and risk ratio with 95% confidence interval. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB tool for RCTs. Our outcomes were mortality, pain, opioid and midazolam requirements, delirium rates, and ICU length of stay.
RESULTS
Twelve RCTs involving 805 ICU patients (ketamine group, n=398; control group, n=407) were included in the meta-analysis. The ketamine group was not superior to the control group in terms of mortality (in five studies with 318 patients), pain (two studies with 129 patients), mean and cumulative opioid consumption (six studies with 494 patients), midazolam consumption (six studies with 304 patients), and ICU length of stay (three studies with 270 patients). However, the model favored the ketamine group over the control group in delirium rate (four studies with 358 patients). This result is significant in terms of conventional boundaries (alpha=5%) but is not robust in sequential analysis. The applicability of the findings is limited by the small number of patients pooled for each outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis did not demonstrate differences between ketamine and control groups regarding any outcome except delirium rate, where the model favored the ketamine group over the control group. However, this result is not robust as sensitivity analysis and trial sequential analysis suggest that more RCTs should be conducted in the future.
PubMed: 38476062
DOI: 10.4266/acc.2023.00829 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Dec 2021During laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion, patients need to enter a sufficient depth of sedation to prevent limb movement, coughing, laryngospasm, and other adverse... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
During laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion, patients need to enter a sufficient depth of sedation to prevent limb movement, coughing, laryngospasm, and other adverse reactions. This study conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the effect of dexmedetomidine on anesthesia induction in patients undergoing laryngeal mask intubation (LMI).
METHODS
The Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched using the keywords [Dexmedetomidine] AND [Laryngeal mask/Laryngeal mask intubation/LMI] OR [Anesthesia induction] to retrieve articles on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which dexmedetomidine sedation had been used in the LMI surgery. After screening the articles, the Jadad scale was used to assess the bias of the studies, and Stata16.0 software was used for the analysis to determine the anesthetic-induction effects of dexmedetomidine, fentanyl, morphine, and midazolam as sedatives.
RESULTS
In total, 352 articles were initially retrieved, and 7 articles with a total of 410 patients were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. The effective rate of LMI induced by dexmedetomidine-assisted sedation was better than that of the control group [odds ratio (OR) =1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78, 1.53], but the difference between the 2 groups was not significant (Z=0.533, P=0.594). The respiratory rate of the dexmedetomidine group at 5 minutes after dexmedetomidine catheterization was higher than that of the control group [standardized mean difference (SMD) =3.17, 95% CI: 1.38, 4.96; Z=3.476, P=0.001]. The heart rate of the dexmedetomidine group at 1 minute after dexmedetomidine catheterization was significantly lower than that of the control group (SMD =-1.31, 95% CI: -1.91, -0.71; Z=-4.255, P=0.000). The mean arterial pressure (MAP) of the dexmedetomidine group at 1 minute after dexmedetomidine catheterization was lower than that of the control group (SMD =-0.24, 95% CI: -0.94, 0.45), but the difference was not statistically significant (Z=-0.684, P=0.494). The coughing count rate of the dexmedetomidine group was lower than that of the control group (OR =0.36, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.86; Z=-2.286, P=0.022).
DISCUSSION
The application of dexmedetomidine in the anesthesia induction with LMI has a good sedative effect, improves the success rate of LMI, reduces adverse reactions.
Topics: Anesthesia; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Laryngeal Masks; Midazolam
PubMed: 35016404
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-2971