-
British Journal of Anaesthesia Jan 2023Sedation techniques and drugs are increasingly used in children undergoing imaging procedures. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we present an overview of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Sedation techniques and drugs are increasingly used in children undergoing imaging procedures. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we present an overview of literature concerning sedation of children aged 0-8 yr for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) procedures using needle-free pharmacological techniques.
METHODS
Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for studies on the use of needle-free pharmacological sedation techniques for MRI procedures in children aged 0-8 yr. Studies using i.v. or i.m. medication or advanced airway devices were excluded. We performed a meta-analysis on sedation success rate. Secondary outcomes were onset time, duration, recovery, and adverse events.
RESULTS
Sixty-seven studies were included, with 22 380 participants. The pooled success rate for oral chloral hydrate was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-0.96); for oral chloral hydrate and intranasal dexmedetomidine 95% (95% CI: 0.92-0.97); for rectal, oral, or intranasal midazolam 36% (95% CI: 0.14-0.65); for oral pentobarbital 99% (95% CI: 0.90-1.00); for rectal thiopental 92% (95% CI: 0.85-0.96); for oral melatonin 75% (95% CI: 0.54-0.89); for intranasal dexmedetomidine 62% (95% CI: 0.38-0.82); for intranasal dexmedetomidine and midazolam 94% (95% CI: 0.78-0.99); and for inhaled sevoflurane 98% (95% CI: 0.97-0.99).
CONCLUSIONS
We found a large variation in medication, dosage, and route of administration for needle-free sedation. Success rates for sedation techniques varied between 36% and 98%.
Topics: Child; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Midazolam; Dexmedetomidine; Administration, Oral; Chloral Hydrate; Administration, Intranasal; Conscious Sedation
PubMed: 36283870
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2022.09.007 -
The Laryngoscope Jan 2016Drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) is used to determine surgical therapy for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA); however, the effects of anesthesia on the upper airway are... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS
Drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) is used to determine surgical therapy for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA); however, the effects of anesthesia on the upper airway are poorly understood. Our aim was to systematically review existing literature on the effects of anesthetic agents on the upper airway.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, CINAHL, EBM reviews and Scopus (all indexed years).
REVIEW METHODS
Inclusion criteria included English language articles containing original human data. Two investigators independently reviewed all articles for outcomes related to upper airway morphology, dynamics, neuromuscular response, and respiratory control.
RESULTS
The initial search yielded 180 abstracts; 56 articles were ultimately included (total population = 8,540). The anesthetic agents studied were: topical lidocaine, propofol, dexmedetomidine, midazolam, pentobarbital, sevoflurane, desflurane, ketamine, and opioids. Outcome measures were diverse and included imaging studies, genioglossus electromyography, endoscopic airway assessment, polysomnography, upper airway closing pressure, and clinical evidence of obstruction. All agents caused some degrees of airway collapse. Dexmedetomidine did not have dose-dependent effects when evaluated using cine magnetic resonance imaging, unlike sevoflurane, isoflurane, and propofol, and caused less dynamic collapse than propofol.
CONCLUSIONS
Studies assessing the effect of anesthesia on the upper airway in patients with and without OSA are limited, and few compare effects between agents. Medications with minimal effect on respiratory control (e.g., dexmedetomidine) may work best for DISE.
Topics: Airway Resistance; Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthetics; Humans; Larynx; Pharynx; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive
PubMed: 26198715
DOI: 10.1002/lary.25399 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Jun 2020Procedural sedation for non-painful pediatric examinations outside the operating room remains a challenge, this study was designed to compare the safety and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STUDY OBJECTIVE
Procedural sedation for non-painful pediatric examinations outside the operating room remains a challenge, this study was designed to compare the safety and effectiveness of sedation provided by dexmedetomidine versus other sedatives including chloral hydrate, midazolam, and pentobarbital for pediatric patients to complete diagnostic examinations.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs.
SETTING
Pediatric procedural sedation.
INTERVENTIONS
Comparison of sedation by dexmedetomidine and chloral hydrate, or pentobarbital, or midazolam for pediatric non-painful sedation.
PATIENTS
The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register for randomized clinical trials were searched and limited the studies to those published in English through July 30, 2018.
MEASUREMENTS
Prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing dexmedetomidine to chloral hydrate, pentobarbital, and midazolam for pediatric procedural examinations outside the operating room were included in the meta-analysis. Search terms included dexmedetomidine, precede, adrenergic alpha-2 receptor agonists, adrenergic alpha 2 agonists, adrenergic alpha-agonists, adrenergic alpha 2 receptor agonists, chloral hydrate, pentobarbital, midazolam, AND sedation.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 1486 studies were screened and nine RCTs were identified; 1076 patients were analyzed. Sedation with dexmedetomidine provided statistically higher incidences in completing examinations with fewer episodes of desaturation than the other sedatives did (OR 2.90, 95% CI: 1.39-6.07, P = 0.005, I = 77%; OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15-0.57, P = 0.0004, I = 0%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
The meta-analysis shows that sedation by dexmedetomidine has lower incidence of respiratory depression and provides higher success rates in completing examinations than other traditional sedatives without compromising safety, indicating a prospective clinical use for procedural sedation.
Topics: Child; Chloral Hydrate; Conscious Sedation; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Midazolam; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32018129
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2020.109736 -
Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent... Sep 2008To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether taking antiemetic drugs reduces vomiting and decreases the need for further intervention in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether taking antiemetic drugs reduces vomiting and decreases the need for further intervention in children with gastroenteritis without causing significant adverse effects.
DATA SOURCES
Computerized databases, reference lists, and expert recommendations.
STUDY SELECTION
Prospective controlled trials evaluating medication use in children with vomiting from gastroenteritis.
INTERVENTION
Antiemetic drug therapy.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Emesis cessation, use of intravenous fluid for rehydration, hospital admission, return to care, and medication adverse effects.
RESULTS
The 11 articles that met the inclusion criteria evaluated various antiemetic agents: ondansetron (n = 6), domperidone (n = 2), trimethobenzamide (n = 2), pyrilamine-pentobarbital (n = 2), metoclopramide (n = 2), dexamethasone (n = 1), and promethazine (n = 1). Meta-analysis of 6 randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trials of ondansetron demonstrated decreased risk of further vomiting (5 studies; relative risk [RR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33-0.62; number needed to treat [NNT] = 5), reduced need for intravenous fluid (4 studies; RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28-0.62; NNT = 5), and decreased risk of immediate hospital admission (5 studies; RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95; NNT = 14). Diarrheal episodes increased in ondansetron-treated patients in 3 studies. Ondansetron use did not significantly affect return to care (5 studies; RR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.77-2.35).
CONCLUSIONS
Ondansetron therapy decreases the risk of persistent vomiting, the use of intravenous fluid, and hospital admissions in children with vomiting due to gastroenteritis. Future treatment guidelines should incorporate ondansetron therapy for select children with gastroenteritis.
Topics: Acute Disease; Antiemetics; Child; Gastroenteritis; Humans; Vomiting
PubMed: 18762604
DOI: 10.1001/archpedi.162.9.858 -
Epilepsia Feb 2002New continuous infusion antiepileptic drugs (cIV-AEDs) offer alternatives to pentobarbital for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus (RSE). However, no... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
New continuous infusion antiepileptic drugs (cIV-AEDs) offer alternatives to pentobarbital for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus (RSE). However, no prospective randomized studies have evaluated the treatment of RSE. This systematic review compares the efficacy of midazolam (MDL), propofol (PRO), and pentobarbital (PTB) for terminating seizures and improving outcome in RSE patients.
METHODS
We performed a literature search of studies describing the use of MDL, PRO, or PTB for the treatment of RSE published between January 1970 and September 2001, by using MEDLINE, OVID, and manually searched bibliographies. We included peer-reviewed studies of adult patients with SE refractory to at least two standard AEDs. Main outcome measures were the frequency of immediate treatment failure (clinical or electrographic seizures occurring 1 to 6 h after starting cIV-AED therapy) and mortality according to choice of agent and titration goal (cIV-AED titration to "seizure suppression" versus "EEG background suppression").
RESULTS
Twenty-eight studies describing a total of 193 patients fulfilled our selection criteria: MDL (n = 54), PRO (n = 33), and PTB (n = 106). Forty-eight percent of patients died, and mortality was not significantly associated with the choice of agent or titration goal. PTB was usually titrated to EEG background suppression by using intermittent EEG monitoring, whereas MDL and PRO were more often titrated to seizure suppression with continuous EEG monitoring. Compared with treatment with MDL or PRO, PTB treatment was associated with a lower frequency of short-term treatment failure (8 vs. 23%; p < 0.01), breakthrough seizures (12 vs. 42%; p < 0.001), and changes to a different cIV-AED (3 vs. 21%; p < 0.001), and a higher frequency of hypotension (systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg; 77 vs. 34%; p < 0.001). Compared with seizure suppression (n = 59), titration of treatment to EEG background suppression (n = 87) was associated with a lower frequency of breakthrough seizures (4 vs. 53%; p < 0.001) and a higher frequency of hypotension (76 vs. 29%; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the inherent limitations of a systematic review, our results suggest that treatment with PTB, or any cIV-AED infusion to attain EEG background suppression, may be more effective than other strategies for treating RSE. However, these interventions also were associated with an increased frequency of hypotension, and no effect on mortality was seen. A prospective randomized trial comparing different agents and titration goals for RSE with obligatory continuous EEG monitoring is needed.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; GABA Modulators; Humans; Midazolam; Pentobarbital; Propofol; Status Epilepticus
PubMed: 11903460
DOI: 10.1046/j.1528-1157.2002.28501.x -
Journal of Neurochemistry Jul 2012Protective effects of statins have been well documented for stroke therapy. Here, we used a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess these evidences. We identified... (Review)
Review
Protective effects of statins have been well documented for stroke therapy. Here, we used a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess these evidences. We identified 190 studies using statin treatment in stroke animal models by electronic searching. From those, only studies describing ischemic occlusive stroke and reporting data on infarct volume and/or neurological outcome were included in the analysis (41 publications, 1882 animals). The global estimate effect was assessed by Weighted Mean Difference meta-analysis. Statins reduced infarct volume by 25.12% (20.66%-29.58%, P < 0.001) and consistently, induced an improvement on neurological outcome (20.36% (14.17%-26.56%), P < 0.001). Stratified analysis showed that simvastatin had the greatest effect on infarct volume reduction (38.18%) and neurological improvement (22.94%), whereas bigger infarct reduction was observed giving the statin as a pre-treatment (33.5%) compared with post-treatment (16.02%). The use of pentobarbital sodium, the timing of statin administration, the statement of conflict of interest and the type of statin studied were found to be independent factors in the meta-regression, indicating their influence on the results of studies examining statin treatment. In conclusion, this meta-analysis provides further evidences of the efficacy of statins, supporting their potential use for human stroke therapy.
Topics: Animals; Brain Ischemia; Data Interpretation, Statistical; Disease Models, Animal; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Infarction, Middle Cerebral Artery; Mice; Publication Bias; Rats; Regression Analysis; Research Design; Stroke
PubMed: 22548274
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2012.07773.x -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2013Mannitol is sometimes effective in reversing acute brain swelling, but its effectiveness in the ongoing management of severe head injury remains unclear. There is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Mannitol is sometimes effective in reversing acute brain swelling, but its effectiveness in the ongoing management of severe head injury remains unclear. There is evidence that, in prolonged dosage, mannitol may pass from the blood into the brain, where it might cause increased intracranial pressure.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of different mannitol therapy regimens, of mannitol compared to other intracranial pressure (ICP) lowering agents, and to quantify the effectiveness of mannitol administration given at other stages following acute traumatic brain injury.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), ISI Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED & CPCI-S) and PubMed. We checked reference lists of trials and review articles, and contacted authors of trials. The search was updated on the 20th April 2009.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of mannitol, in patients with acute traumatic brain injury of any severity. The comparison group could be placebo-controlled, no drug, different dose, or different drug. We excluded cross-over trials, and trials where the intervention was started more than eight weeks after injury.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently rated quality of allocation concealment and extracted the data. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each trial on an intention to treat basis.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified four eligible randomised controlled trials. One trial compared ICP-directed therapy to 'standard care' (RR for death = 0.83; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.46). One trial compared mannitol to pentobarbital (RR for death = 0.85; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38). One trial compared mannitol to hypertonic saline (RR for death = 1.25; 95% CI 0.47 to 3.33). One trial tested the effectiveness of pre-hospital administration of mannitol against placebo (RR for death = 1.75; 95% CI 0.48 to 6.38).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Mannitol therapy for raised ICP may have a beneficial effect on mortality when compared to pentobarbital treatment, but may have a detrimental effect on mortality when compared to hypertonic saline. ICP-directed treatment shows a small beneficial effect compared to treatment directed by neurological signs and physiological indicators. There are insufficient data on the effectiveness of pre-hospital administration of mannitol.
Topics: Acute Disease; Brain Injuries; Diuretics, Osmotic; Humans; Intracranial Hypertension; Intracranial Pressure; Mannitol; Pentobarbital; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Saline Solution, Hypertonic
PubMed: 23918314
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001049.pub5 -
Life Sciences Nov 2021To summarize the knowledge on the effect of anesthetics employed right before euthanasia on biological outcomes. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
To summarize the knowledge on the effect of anesthetics employed right before euthanasia on biological outcomes.
DATA SOURCE
A systematic review of the literature to find studies with isoflurane, ketamine, halothane, pentobarbital, or thiopental just before euthanasia of laboratory rats or mice.
STUDY SELECTION
Controlled studies with quantitative data available.
DATA EXTRACTION
The search, data extraction, and risk of bias (RoB) were performed independently by two reviewers using a structured form. For each outcome, an effect size (ES) was calculated relative to the control group. Meta-analysis was performed using robust variance meta-regression for hierarchical data structures, with adjustment for small samples.
DATA SYNTHESIS
We included 20 studies with 407 biological outcomes (110 unique). RoB analysis indicated that 87.5% of the domains evaluated showed unclear risk, 2% high risk, and 10.5% low risk. The effect size for all anesthetics considered together was 0.99 (CI = 0.75-1.23; p < 0.0001). Sub-analyses indicate high effect sizes for pentobarbital (1.14; CI = 0.75-1.52; p < 0.0001), and isoflurane (1.01; CI = 0.58-1.44; p = 0.0005) but not for ketamine (1.49; CI = -7.95-10.9; p = 0.295).
CONCLUSION
We showed that anesthetics interfere differently with the majority of the outcomes assessed. However, our data did not support the use of one anesthetic over others or even the killing without anesthetics. We conclude that outcomes cannot be compared among studies without considering the killing method. This protocol was registered at Prospero (CRD42019119520).
FUNDING
There was no direct funding for this research.
Topics: Anesthetics; Animals; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Euthanasia; Mice; Publication Bias; Rats; Risk
PubMed: 34480936
DOI: 10.1016/j.lfs.2021.119916 -
JAMA Neurology May 2024Multiple continuous intravenous anesthetic drugs (CIVADs) are available for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus (RSE). There is a paucity of data comparing...
IMPORTANCE
Multiple continuous intravenous anesthetic drugs (CIVADs) are available for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus (RSE). There is a paucity of data comparing the different types of CIVADs used for RSE.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review and compare outcome measures associated with the initial CIVAD choice in RSE in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
Data sources included English and non-English articles using Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Web of Science (January 1994-June 2023) as well as manual search. Study selection included peer-reviewed studies of 5 or more patients and at least 1 patient older than 12 years with status epilepticus refractory to a benzodiazepine and at least 1 standard antiseizure medication, treated with continuously infused midazolam, ketamine, propofol, pentobarbital, or thiopental. Independent extraction of articles was performed using prespecified data items. The association between outcome variables and CIVAD was examined with an analysis of variance or χ2 test where appropriate. Binary logistic regressions were used to examine the association between outcome variables and CIVAD with etiology, change in mortality over time, electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring (continuous vs intermittent), and treatment goal (seizure vs burst suppression) included as covariates. Risk of bias was addressed by listing the population and type of each study.
FINDINGS
A total of 66 studies with 1637 patients were included. Significant differences among CIVAD groups in short-term failure, hypotension, and CIVAD substitution during treatment were observed. Non-epilepsy-related RSE (vs epilepsy-related RSE) was associated with a higher rate of CIVAD substitution (60 of 120 [50.0%] vs 11 of 43 [25.6%]; odds ratio [OR], 3.11; 95% CI, 1.44-7.11; P = .006) and mortality (98 of 227 [43.2%] vs 7 of 63 [11.1%]; OR, 17.0; 95% CI, 4.71-109.35; P < .001). Seizure suppression was associated with mortality (OR, 7.72; 95% CI, 1.77-39.23; P = .005), but only a small subgroup was available for analysis (seizure suppression: 17 of 22 [77.3%] from 3 publications vs burst suppression: 25 of 98 [25.5%] from 12 publications). CIVAD choice and EEG type were not predictors of mortality. Earlier publication year was associated with mortality, although the observation was no longer statistically significant after adjusting SEs for clustering.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Epilepsy-related RSE was associated with lower mortality compared with other RSE etiologies. A trend of decreasing mortality over time was observed, which may suggest an effect of advances in neurocritical care. The overall data are heterogeneous, which limits definitive conclusions on the choice of optimal initial CIVAD in RSE treatment.
Topics: Humans; Status Epilepticus; Anesthetics, Intravenous; Drug Resistant Epilepsy; Anticonvulsants
PubMed: 38466294
DOI: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.0108 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2012Raised intracranial pressure (ICP) is an important complication of severe brain injury, and is associated with high mortality. Barbiturates are believed to reduce ICP by... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Raised intracranial pressure (ICP) is an important complication of severe brain injury, and is associated with high mortality. Barbiturates are believed to reduce ICP by suppressing cerebral metabolism, thus reducing cerebral metabolic demands and cerebral blood volume. However, barbiturates also reduce blood pressure and may, therefore, adversely effect cerebral perfusion pressure.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of barbiturates in reducing mortality, disability and raised ICP in people with acute traumatic brain injury. To quantify any side effects resulting from the use of barbiturates.
SEARCH METHODS
The following electronic databases were searched on 26 September 2012: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (Ovid SP), PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid SP), PsycINFO (Ovid SP), PsycEXTRA (Ovid SP), ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science. Searching was not restricted by date, language or publication status. We also searched the reference lists of the included trials and review articles. We contacted researchers for information on ongoing studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of one or more of the barbiturate class of drugs, where study participants had clinically diagnosed acute traumatic brain injury of any severity.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors screened the search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the trials.
MAIN RESULTS
Data from seven trials involving 341 people are included in this review.For barbiturates versus no barbiturate, the pooled risk ratio (RR) of death from three trials was 1.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.47). Death or disability, measured using the Glasgow Outcome Scale was assessed in two trials, the RR with barbiturates was 1.15 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.64). Two trials examined the effect of barbiturate therapy on ICP. In one, a smaller proportion of patients in the barbiturate group had uncontrolled ICP (68% versus 83%); the RR for uncontrolled ICP was 0.81 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.06). In the other, mean ICP was also lower in the barbiturate group. Barbiturate therapy results in an increased occurrence of hypotension (RR 1.80; 95% CI 1.19 to 2.70). For every four patients treated, one developed clinically significant hypotension. Mean body temperature was significantly lower in the barbiturate group.In one study of pentobarbital versus mannitol there was no difference in death between the two study groups (RR 1.21; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.94). Pentobarbital was less effective than mannitol for control of raised ICP (RR 1.75; 95% CI 1.05 to 2.92).In one study the RR of death with pentobarbital versus thiopental was 1.78 (95% CI 1.03 to 3.08) in favour of thiopental. Fewer people had uncontrollable ICP with thiopental (RR 1.64; 95% CI 1.03 to 2.60). There was no significant difference in the effects of pentobarbital versus thiopental for death or disability, measured using the Glasgow Outcome Scale (RR 1.31; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.94), or hypotension (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.12).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is no evidence that barbiturate therapy in patients with acute severe head injury improves outcome. Barbiturate therapy results in a fall in blood pressure in one in four patients. This hypotensive effect will offset any ICP lowering effect on cerebral perfusion pressure.
Topics: Barbiturates; Brain Injuries; Central Nervous System Agents; Cerebrovascular Circulation; Humans; Hypotension; Intracranial Hypertension; Intracranial Pressure; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk
PubMed: 23235573
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000033.pub2