-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Pelvic, hip, and long bone fractures can result in significant bleeding at the time of injury, with further blood loss if they are treated with surgical fixation. People... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pelvic, hip, and long bone fractures can result in significant bleeding at the time of injury, with further blood loss if they are treated with surgical fixation. People undergoing surgery are therefore at risk of requiring a blood transfusion and may be at risk of peri-operative anaemia. Pharmacological interventions for blood conservation may reduce the risk of requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion and associated complications.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of different pharmacological interventions for reducing blood loss in definitive surgical fixation of the hip, pelvic, and long bones.
SEARCH METHODS
We used a predefined search strategy to search CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Transfusion Evidence Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) from inception to 7 April 2022, without restrictions on language, year, or publication status. We handsearched reference lists of included trials to identify further relevant trials. We contacted authors of ongoing trials to acquire any unpublished data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people who underwent trauma (non-elective) surgery for definitive fixation of hip, pelvic, and long bone (pelvis, tibia, femur, humerus, radius, ulna and clavicle) fractures only. There were no restrictions on gender, ethnicity, or age. We excluded planned (elective) procedures (e.g. scheduled total hip arthroplasty), and studies published since 2010 that had not been prospectively registered. Eligible interventions included: antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid, aprotinin, epsilon-aminocaproic acid), desmopressin, factor VIIa and XIII, fibrinogen, fibrin sealants, and non-fibrin sealants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We did not perform a network meta-analysis due to lack of data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 RCTs (929 participants), published between 2005 and 2021. Three trials did not report any of our predefined outcomes and so were not included in quantitative analyses (all were tranexamic acid versus placebo). We identified three comparisons of interest: intravenous tranexamic acid versus placebo; topical tranexamic acid versus placebo; and recombinant factor VIIa versus placebo. We rated the certainty of evidence as very low to low across all outcomes. Comparison 1. Intravenous tranexamic acid versus placebo Intravenous tranexamic acid compared to placebo may reduce the risk of requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion up to 30 days (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.69; 6 RCTs, 457 participants; low-certainty evidence) and may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) 0.38, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.77; 2 RCTs, 147 participants; low-certainty evidence). It may result in little to no difference in risk of participants experiencing myocardial infarction (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03; 2 RCTs, 199 participants; low-certainty evidence), and cerebrovascular accident/stroke (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; 3 RCTs, 324 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if there is a difference between groups for risk of deep vein thrombosis (Peto OR 2.15, 95% CI 0.22 to 21.35; 4 RCTs, 329 participants, very low-certainty evidence), pulmonary embolism (Peto OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.07 to 17.66; 4 RCTs, 329 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and suspected serious drug reactions (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03; 2 RCTs, 185 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for number of red blood cell units transfused, reoperation, or acute transfusion reaction. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for imprecision (wide confidence intervals around the estimate and small sample size, particularly for rare events), and risk of bias (unclear or high risk methods of blinding and allocation concealment in the assessment of subjective measures), and upgraded the evidence for transfusion requirement for a large effect. Comparison 2. Topical tranexamic acid versus placebo We are uncertain if there is a difference between topical tranexamic acid and placebo for risk of requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.22; 2 RCTs, 101 participants), all-cause mortality (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.10; 1 RCT, 36 participants), risk of participants experiencing myocardial infarction (Peto OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.00 to 7.62; 1 RCT, 36 participants), cerebrovascular accident/stroke (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; 1 RCT, 65 participants); and deep vein thrombosis (Peto OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.07 to 17.77; 2 RCTs, 101 participants). All outcomes reported were very low-certainty evidence. No data were available for number of red blood cell units transfused, reoperation, incidence of pulmonary embolism, acute transfusion reaction, or suspected serious drug reactions. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for imprecision (wide confidence intervals around the estimate and small sample size, particularly for rare events), inconsistency (moderate heterogeneity), and risk of bias (unclear or high risk methods of blinding and allocation concealment in the assessment of subjective measures, and high risk of attrition and reporting biases in one trial). Comparison 3. Recombinant factor VIIa versus placebo Only one RCT of 48 participants reported data for recombinant factor VIIa versus placebo, so we have not presented the results here.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We cannot draw conclusions from the current evidence due to lack of data. Most published studies included in our analyses assessed the use of tranexamic acid (compared to placebo, or using different routes of administration). We identified 27 prospectively registered ongoing RCTs (total target recruitment of 4177 participants by end of 2023). The ongoing trials create six new comparisons: tranexamic acid (tablet + injection) versus placebo; intravenous tranexamic acid versus oral tranexamic acid; topical tranexamic acid versus oral tranexamic acid; different intravenous tranexamic acid dosing regimes; topical tranexamic acid versus topical fibrin glue; and fibrinogen (injection) versus placebo.
Topics: Humans; Tranexamic Acid; Hemorrhage; Hemostatics; Fibrinogen; Pulmonary Embolism; Venous Thrombosis; Stroke; Myocardial Infarction; Arthroplasty, Replacement; Transfusion Reaction; Fractures, Bone
PubMed: 37272509
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013499.pub2 -
Current Problems in Cardiology Oct 2023Twelve CCI patients were studied with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection. The majority of these patients were males (83.3%) with a median age of 55 years from... (Review)
Review
Twelve CCI patients were studied with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection. The majority of these patients were males (83.3%) with a median age of 55 years from three geographical locations, constituting the Middle East (7), Spain (3), and the USA (1). In 6 patients, IgG/IgM was positive for COVID-19, 4 with high pretest probability and 2 with positive RT-PCR. Type 2 DM, hyperlipidemia, and smoking were the primary risk factors. Right-sided neurological impairments and verbal impairment were the most common symptoms. Our analysis found 8 (66%) synchronous occurrences. In 58.3% of cases, neuroimaging showed left Middle Cerebral Artery (MCA) infarct and 33.3% right. Carotid artery thrombosis (16.6%), tandem occlusion (8.3%), and carotid stenosis (1%) were also reported in imaging. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and anticoagulants were conservative therapies (10). Two AMI patients had aspiration thrombectomy, while three AIS patients had intravenous thrombolysis/tissue plasminogen activator (IVT-tPA), 2 had mechanical thrombectomy (MT), and 1 had decompressive craniotomy. Five had COVID-19-positive chest X-rays, whereas 4 were normal. four of 8 STEMI and 3 NSTEMI/UA patients complained chest pain. LV, ICA, and pulmonary embolism were further complications (2). Upon discharge, 7 patients (70%) had residual deficits while 1 patient unfortunately died.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Anticoagulants; COVID-19; Infarction, Middle Cerebral Artery; Stroke; Thrombectomy; Thrombolytic Therapy; Tissue Plasminogen Activator; Treatment Outcome; Case Reports as Topic
PubMed: 37209804
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2023.101814 -
EClinicalMedicine May 2023Isolated pulmonary embolism (PE) appears to be associated with a specific clinical profile and sequelae compared to deep vein thrombosis (DVT)-associated PE. The...
BACKGROUND
Isolated pulmonary embolism (PE) appears to be associated with a specific clinical profile and sequelae compared to deep vein thrombosis (DVT)-associated PE. The objective of this study was to identify clinical characteristics that discriminate both phenotypes, and to characterize their differences in clinical outcome.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing PE phenotypes. A systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed and CENTRAL was conducted, from inception until January 27, 2023. Exclusion criteria were irrelevant content, inability to retrieve the article, language other than English or German, the article comprising a review or case study/series, and inappropriate study design. Data on risk factors, clinical characteristics and clinical endpoints were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.
FINDINGS
Fifty studies with 435,768 PE patients were included. In low risk of bias studies, 30% [95% CI 19-42%, = 97%] of PE were isolated. The Factor V Leiden [OR: 0.47, 95% CI 0.37-0.58, = 0%] and prothrombin G20210A mutations [OR: 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.75, = 0%] were significantly less prevalent among patients with isolated PE. Female sex [OR: 1.30, 95% CI 1.17-1.45, = 79%], recent invasive surgery [OR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.23-1.41, = 65%], a history of myocardial infarction [OR: 2.07, 95% CI 1.85-2.32, = 0%], left-sided heart failure [OR: 1.70, 95% CI 1.37-2.10, = 76%], peripheral artery disease [OR: 1.36, 95% CI 1.31-1.42, = 0%] and diabetes mellitus [OR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.21-1.25, = 0%] were significantly more frequently represented among isolated PE patients. In a synthesis of clinical outcome data, the risk of recurrent VTE in isolated PE was half that of DVT-associated PE [RR: 0.55, 95% CI 0.44-0.69, = 0%], while the risk of arterial thrombosis was nearly 3-fold higher [RR: 2.93, 95% CI 1.43-6.02, = 0%].
INTERPRETATION
Our findings suggest that isolated PE appears to be a specific entity that may signal a long-term risk of arterial thrombosis. Randomised controlled trials are necessary to establish whether alternative treatment regimens are beneficial for this patient subgroup.
FUNDING
None.
PubMed: 37152363
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101973 -
Clinical Kidney Journal May 2023Renal anemia in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with poor outcomes. Hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) stabilizer, which induces endogenous erythropoietin...
The impacts of hypoxia-inducible factor stabilizers on laboratory parameters and clinical outcomes in chronic kidney disease patients with renal anemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Renal anemia in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with poor outcomes. Hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) stabilizer, which induces endogenous erythropoietin synthesis and enhances iron mobilization, is a novel treatment for anemia in CKD. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze the effect of HIF stabilizers in anemic CKD patients. This meta-analysis included 43 officially published articles and 3 unpublished studies (27 338 patients). HIF stabilizer treatment significantly increased hemoglobin (Hb) level when compared with placebo (mean difference 1.19 g/dL; 95% confidence interval 0.94 to 1.44 g/dL; < .001). There was no significant difference in Hb level when compared with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). Significant reductions of ferritin and transferrin saturation (TSAT) were observed, while total iron-binding capacity was increased in the HIF stabilizer group compared with placebo or ESAs. HIF stabilizers significantly reduced hepcidin, high-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein and triglyceride levels. Acute kidney injury and thrombotic events were significantly observed in patients receiving HIF stabilizers. There were no significant differences in myocardial infarction, stroke, dialysis initiation, pulmonary hypertension and mortality between HIF stabilizer and control groups. The present meta-analysis provided evidence that HIF stabilizers increased Hb and TIBC levels and reduced hepcidin, ferritin and TSAT in CKD patients with renal anemia. Long-term follow-up studies on clinical outcomes of HIF stabilizers are still needed.
PubMed: 37151413
DOI: 10.1093/ckj/sfac271 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2023Aortic aneurysms occur when the aorta, the body's largest artery, grows in size, and can occur in the thoracic or abdominal aorta. The approaches to repair aortic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Aortic aneurysms occur when the aorta, the body's largest artery, grows in size, and can occur in the thoracic or abdominal aorta. The approaches to repair aortic aneurysms include directly exposing the aorta and replacing the diseased segment via open repair, or endovascular repair. Endovascular repair uses fluoroscopic-guidance to access the aorta and deliver a device to exclude the aneurysmal aortic segment without requiring a large surgical incision. Endovascular repair can be performed under a general anesthetic, during which the unconscious patient is paralyzed and reliant on an anesthetic machine to maintain the airway and provide oxygen to the lungs, or a loco-regional anesethetic, for which medications are administered to provide the person with sufficient sedation and pain control without requiring a general anesthetic. While people undergoing general anesthesia are more likely to remain still during surgery and have a well-controlled airway in the event of unanticipated complications, loco-regional anesthesia is associated with fewer postoperative complications in some studies. It remains unclear which anesthetic technique is associated with better outcomes following the endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of general anesthesia compared to loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was 11 March 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for all randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of general anesthesia compared to loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay. Our secondary outcomes were: incidence of endoleaks, requirement for re-intervention, incidence of myocardial infarction, quality of life, incidence of respiratory complications, incidence of pulmonary embolism, incidence of deep vein thrombosis, and length of procedure. We planned to use GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We found no studies, published or ongoing, that met our inclusion criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not identify any randomized controlled trials that compared general versus loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. There is currently insufficient high-quality evidence to determine the benefits or harms of either anesthetic approach during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Well-designed prospective randomized trials with relevant clinical outcomes are needed to adequately address this.
Topics: Humans; Anesthesia, Conduction; Anesthesia, General; Anesthetics, General; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Endovascular Procedures; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life
PubMed: 37052421
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013182.pub2 -
The American Journal of Cardiology May 2023There is lack of evidence regarding the optimal revascularization strategy in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel disease... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Non-ST-Elevation Coronary Syndromes and Multivessel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
There is lack of evidence regarding the optimal revascularization strategy in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD). This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the clinical impact of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with that of coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) in this subset of patients. EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Knowledge were searched for studies including patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD who underwent PCI or CABG up to September 1, 2021. The primary end point of the meta-analysis was all-cause mortality at 1 year. The secondary end points were myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or repeat revascularization at 1 year. The analysis was conducted using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model to calculate the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Four prospective observational studies met the inclusion criteria, including 1,542 patients who underwent CABG and 1,630 patients who underwent PCI. No significant differences were found in terms of all-cause mortality (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.21, p = 0.51), MI (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.51, p = 0.46), or stroke (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.35, p = 0.42) between PCI and CABG. Repeat revascularization was significantly lower in the CABG group (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.34, p <0.00001). In patients presenting with NSTE-ACS and MVD, 1-year mortality, MI, and stroke were similar between patients treated with either PCI or CABG, but the repeat revascularization rate was higher after PCI.
Topics: Humans; Coronary Artery Disease; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Coronary Artery Bypass; Myocardial Infarction; Acute Coronary Syndrome; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37011556
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.03.005 -
Immunity, Inflammation and Disease Mar 2023Since publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Since publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about cardiovascular complications following the mRNA vaccination. This study provides an in-depth account of various cardiovascular adverse events reported after the mRNA vaccines' first or second dose including pericarditis/myopericarditis, myocarditis, hypotension, hypertension, arrhythmia, cardiogenic shock, stroke, myocardial infarction/STEMI, intracranial hemorrhage, thrombosis (deep vein thrombosis, cerebral venous thrombosis, arterial or venous thrombotic events, portal vein thrombosis, coronary thrombosis, microvascular small bowel thrombosis), and pulmonary embolism.
METHODS
A systematic review of original studies reporting confirmed cardiovascular manifestations post-mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was performed. Following the PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases (PubMed, PMC NCBI, and Cochrane Library) were searched until January 2022. Baseline characteristics of patients and disease outcomes were extracted from relevant studies.
RESULTS
A total of 81 articles analyzed confirmed cardiovascular complications post-COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in 17,636 individuals and reported 284 deaths with any mRNA vaccine. Of 17,636 cardiovascular events with any mRNA vaccine, 17,192 were observed with the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine, 444 events with mRNA-1273 (Moderna). Thrombosis was frequently reported with any mRNA vaccine (n = 13,936), followed by stroke (n = 758), myocarditis (n = 511), myocardial infarction (n = 377), pulmonary embolism (n = 301), and arrhythmia (n = 254). Stratifying the results by vaccine type showed that thrombosis (80.8%) was common in the BNT162b2 cohort, while stroke (39.9%) was common with mRNA-1273 for any dose. The time between the vaccination dosage and the first symptom onset averaged 5.6 and 4.8 days with the mRNA-1273 vaccine and BNT162b2, respectively. The mRNA-1273 cohort reported 56 deaths compared to the 228 with BNT162b2, while the rest were discharged or transferred to the ICU.
CONCLUSION
Available literature includes more studies with the BNT162b2 vaccine than mRNA-1273. Future studies must report mortality and adverse cardiovascular events by vaccine types.
Topics: Humans; 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273; BNT162 Vaccine; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Myocardial Infarction; Myocarditis; Pulmonary Embolism; Stroke; Thrombocytopenia; Thrombosis
PubMed: 36988252
DOI: 10.1002/iid3.807 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Mar 2023To determine the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBO) in the treatment of necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTI), we conducted a meta-analysis of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
To determine the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBO) in the treatment of necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTI), we conducted a meta-analysis of the available evidence.
METHODS
Data sources were PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and reference lists. The study included observational trials that compared HBO with non-HBO, or standard care. The primary outcome was the mortality rate. Secondary outcomes were the number of debridement, amputation rate and complication rate. Relative risks or standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively.
RESULTS
A total of retrospective cohort and case-control studies were included, including 49,152 patients, 1448 who received HBO and 47,704 in control. The mortality rate in the HBO group was significantly lower than that in the non-HBO group [RR = 0.522, 95% CI (0.403, 0.677), p < 0.05]. However, the number of debridements performed in the HBO group was higher than in the non-HBO group [SMD = 0.611, 95% CI (0.012, 1.211), p < 0.05]. There was no significant difference in amputation rates between the two groups [RR = 0.836, 95% CI (0.619, 1.129), p > 0.05]. In terms of complications, the incidence of MODS was lower in the HBO group than in the non-HBO group [RR = 0.205, 95% CI (0.164, 0.256), p < 0.05]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of other complications, such as sepsis, shock, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, and pneumonia, between the two groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
The current evidence suggests that the use of HBO in the treatment of NSTI can significantly reduce the mortality rates and the incidence rates of complications. However, due to the retrospective nature of the studies, the evidence is weak, and further research is needed to establish its efficacy. It is also important to note that HBO is not available in all hospitals, and its use should be carefully considered based on the patient's individual circumstances. Additionally, it is still worthwhile to stress the significance of promptly evaluating surgical risks to prevent missing the optimal treatment time.
Topics: Humans; Soft Tissue Infections; Hyperbaric Oxygenation; Retrospective Studies; Debridement; Combined Modality Therapy
PubMed: 36966323
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00490-y -
Respiratory Care Apr 2023Daily application of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) is used increasingly in patients with neuromuscular diseases (NMDs) to prevent pulmonary congestion and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Daily application of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) is used increasingly in patients with neuromuscular diseases (NMDs) to prevent pulmonary congestion and thereby respiratory tract infections, although its beneficial effect remains uncertain. We, therefore, conducted a systematic review, registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020158278), to compile available evidence for daily MI-E use in subjects with NMDs and stable respiratory condition.
METHODS
We performed a systematic comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science up to December 23, 2021. We excluded articles studying the effect of MI-E in case of acute respiratory failure or infections and studies comparing different MI-E devices and settings. Studied outcomes were prevalence and severity of respiratory infections, lung function, respiratory characteristics, and patient satisfaction. We performed a meta-analysis using DerSimonian-Laird random effects model and assessed methodological quality by using the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research tool.
RESULTS
A total of 3,374 records were screened, of which 25 were included, studying 608 subjects. One randomized controlled trial (RCT) found a trend toward reduced duration of respiratory infections compared to air stacking (AS) that was not statistically significant. Long-term effects on pulmonary function tests (PFT) results were reported in one RCT and one retrospective study, with mixed results regarding vital capacity. Most studies compared PFT results before and immediately after MI-E use. Meta-analysis showed an overall beneficial effect of MI-E on cough peak flow (CPF) compared to unassisted CPF (mean difference 91.6 L/min [95% CI 28.3-155.0], < .001). Subject satisfaction was high, though possibly influenced by major bias.
CONCLUSIONS
There is limited evidence available to support beneficial effects of daily use of MI-E in clinically stable subjects with NMDs, with the possible exception of increased CPF immediately after MI-E application. Lack of longitudinal studies preclude conclusions regarding long-term effects. The very limited data comparing MI-E to AS preclude comparisons.
Topics: Humans; Insufflation; Respiration, Artificial; Neuromuscular Diseases; Cough; Respiratory Tract Infections; Myocardial Infarction; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36963967
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.09664 -
International Journal of Surgery... Mar 2023Controversy remains over the choice of anaesthetic technique for patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Controversy remains over the choice of anaesthetic technique for patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture.
AIM
The aim was to compare the risk of complication of neuraxial anaesthesia with that of general anaesthesia in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery.
METHODS
This systematic review was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines and was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022337384). The study included eligible randomised controlled trials published before February 2022. Data synthesis was performed to compare the differences between general and neuraxial anaesthesia. Meta-regression analysis was performed to investigate the influence of the publication year. A subgroup analysis was performed based on patient age and the anaesthetic technique used. A grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluations assessment was performed to assess the quality of each outcome.
RESULTS
Twenty randomised controlled trials and 4802 patients were included. Data synthesis revealed significant higher risk of acute kidney injury in the general anaesthesia group ( P =0.01). There were no significant differences between the two techniques in postoperative short-term mortality ( P =0.34), delirium ( P =0.40), postoperative nausea and vomiting ( P =0.40), cardiac infarction ( P =0.31), acute heart failure ( P =0.34), pulmonary embolism ( P =0.24) and pneumonia ( P =0.15). Subgroup analysis based on patient age and use of sedative medication did not reveal any significant differences. Meta-regression analysis of the publication year versus each adverse event revealed no statistically significant differences.
CONCLUSION
A significantly higher risk of postoperative acute kidney injury was found in patients receiving general anaesthesia. This study revealed no significant differences in terms of postoperative mortality and other complications between general and neuraxial anaesthesia. The results were consistent across the age groups.
Topics: Humans; Postoperative Complications; Anesthesia, General; Hip Fractures; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Anesthesiology; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36912758
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000291