-
BMJ Open May 2024Despite the publication of hundreds of trials on obstetric anaesthesia, the management of these conditions remains suboptimal. We aimed to assess the quality and...
OBJECTIVES
Despite the publication of hundreds of trials on obstetric anaesthesia, the management of these conditions remains suboptimal. We aimed to assess the quality and consistency of guidance documents for obstetric anaesthesia.
DESIGN
This is a systematic review and quality assessment using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II methodology.
DATA SOURCES
Data sources include PubMed and Embase (8 June 2023), three Chinese academic databases, six guideline databases (7 June 2023) and Google and Google scholar (1 August 2023).
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included the latest version of international and national/regional clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements for the anaesthetic management of pregnant patients during labour, non-operative delivery, operative delivery and selected aspects of perioperative monitoring, postpartum care and analgesia, published in English or Chinese.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently screened the searched items and extracted data. Four reviewers independently scored documents using AGREE II. Recommendations from all documents were tabulated and visualised in a coloured grid.
RESULTS
Twenty-two guidance documents (14 clinical practice guidelines and 8 consensus statements) were included. Included documents performed well in the domains of scope and purpose (median 76.4%, IQR 69.4%-79.2%) and clarity of presentation (median 72.2%, IQR 61.1%-80.6%), but were unsatisfactory in applicability (median 21.9%, IQR 13.5%-27.1%) and editorial independence (median 47.9%, IQR 6.3%-73.2%). The majority of obstetric anaesthesia guidelines or consensus centred on different topics. Less than 30% of them specifically addressed the management of obstetric anaesthesia perioperatively. Recommendations were concordant on the perioperative preparation, and on some indications for the choice of anaesthesia method. Substantially different recommendations were provided for some items, especially for preoperative blood type and screen, and for the types and doses of neuraxial administration.
CONCLUSIONS
The methodological quality in guidance documents for obstetric anaesthesia necessitates enhancement. Despite numerous trials in this area, evidence gaps persist for specific clinical queries in this field. One potential approach to mitigate these challenges involves the endorsement of standardised guidance development methods and the synthesis of robust clinical evidence, aimed at diminishing difference in recommendations.
Topics: Humans; Anesthesia, Obstetrical; Female; Pregnancy; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Consensus
PubMed: 38806417
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084759 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Jul 2024The efficacy of perineural vs intravenous dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct to increase duration of analgesia could be particular to specific peripheral nerve... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Intravenous versus perineural dexamethasone to prolong analgesia after interscalene brachial plexus block: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
BACKGROUND
The efficacy of perineural vs intravenous dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct to increase duration of analgesia could be particular to specific peripheral nerve blocks because of differences in systemic absorption depending on the injection site. Given this uncertainty, we performed a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis comparing dexamethasone administered perineurally or intravenously combined with local anaesthetic for interscalene brachial plexus block.
METHODS
Following a search of various electronic databases, we included 11 trials (1145 patients). The primary outcome was the duration of analgesia defined as the time between peripheral nerve block or onset of sensory blockade and the time to first analgesic request or initial report of pain.
RESULTS
The primary outcome, duration of analgesia, was greater in the perineural dexamethasone group, with a mean difference (95% confidence interval) of 122 (62-183) min, I=73%, P<0.0001. Trial sequential analysis indicated that firm evidence had been reached. The quality of evidence was downgraded to low, mainly because of moderate inconsistency and serious publication bias. No significant differences were present for any of the secondary outcomes, except for onset time of sensory and motor blockade and resting pain score at 12 h, but the magnitude of differences was not clinically relevant.
CONCLUSIONS
There is low-quality evidence that perineural administration of dexamethasone as a local anaesthetic adjunct increases duration of analgesia by an average of 2 h compared with intravenous injection for interscalene brachial plexus block. Given the limited clinical relevance of this difference, the off-label use of perineural administration, and the risk of drug crystallisation, we recommend intravenous dexamethasone administration.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL
PROSPERO (CRD42023466147).
Topics: Humans; Dexamethasone; Brachial Plexus Block; Analgesia; Pain, Postoperative; Administration, Intravenous; Anesthetics, Local; Brachial Plexus
PubMed: 38782616
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2024.03.042 -
EClinicalMedicine Jun 2024General anaesthesia is provided to more than 300 million surgical patients worldwide, every year. It is administered either through total intravenous anaesthesia, using...
BACKGROUND
General anaesthesia is provided to more than 300 million surgical patients worldwide, every year. It is administered either through total intravenous anaesthesia, using only intravenous agents, or through inhalational anaesthesia, using volatile anaesthetic agents. The debate on how this affects postoperative patient outcome is ongoing, despite an abundance of published trials. The relevance of this topic has grown by the increasing concern about the contribution of anaesthetic gases to the environmental impact of surgery. We aimed to summarise all available evidence on relevant patient outcomes with total intravenous anaesthesia versus inhalational anaesthesia.
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials for works published from January 1, 1985 to August 1, 2023 for randomised controlled trials comparing total intravenous anaesthesia using propofol versus inhalational anaesthesia using the volatile anaesthetics sevoflurane, desflurane or isoflurane. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full text articles, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Outcomes were derived from a recent series of publications on consensus definitions for Standardised Endpoints for Perioperative trials (StEP). Primary outcomes covered mortality and organ-related morbidity. Secondary outcomes were related to anaesthetic and surgical morbidity. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023430492).
FINDINGS
We included 317 randomised controlled trials, comprising 51,107 patients. No difference between total intravenous and inhalational anaesthesia was seen in the primary outcomes of in-hospital mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.67-1.66, 27 trials, 3846 patients), 30-day mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70-1.36, 23 trials, 9667 patients) and one-year mortality (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.88-1.48, 13 trials, 9317 patients). Organ-related morbidity was similar between groups except for the subgroup of elderly patients, in which total intravenous anaesthesia was associated with a lower incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40-0.97, 11 trials, 3834 patients) and a better score on postoperative cognitive dysfunction tests (standardised mean difference 1.68, 95% CI 0.47-2.88, 9 trials, 4917 patients). In the secondary outcomes, total intravenous anaesthesia resulted in a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.56-0.67, 145 trials, 23,172 patients), less emergence delirium (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.29-0.56, 32 trials, 4203 patients) and a higher quality of recovery score (QoR-40 mean difference 6.45, 95% CI 3.64-9.25, 17 trials, 1835 patients).
INTERPRETATION
The results indicate that postoperative mortality and organ-related morbidity was similar for intravenous and inhalational anaesthesia. Total intravenous anaesthesia offered advantages in postoperative recovery.
FUNDING
Dutch Society for Anaesthesiology (NVA).
PubMed: 38774674
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102636 -
Minerva Anestesiologica May 2024Peripheral nerve block, a common technique for managing postoperative pain and providing intraoperative analgesia, often includes adjuncts like dexmedetomidine (DEX) to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Peripheral nerve block, a common technique for managing postoperative pain and providing intraoperative analgesia, often includes adjuncts like dexmedetomidine (DEX) to enhance the effectiveness of local anesthetics. DEX, known for its α2-adrenoceptor agonist properties, extends sensory blockade and improves postoperative analgesia while offering sedative benefits. The objective of this study is to rigorously assess the effectiveness and safety of perineural DEX injection in orthopedic nerve block procedures, focusing on orthopedic surgeries to minimize heterogeneity and provide clearer insights for clinical practice.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
This meta-analysis, registered on PROSPERO, involved a comprehensive literature search across multiple databases, focusing on RCTs comparing DEX with local anesthetics for peripheral nerve blocks in orthopedic surgery patients. The eligibility criteria included adult participants and various nerve block methods in orthopedic surgeries. Studies were rigorously appraised for methodological quality using Cochrane Handbook guidelines. GRADE profiler 3.6 was used for evidence grading.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Among 1391 documents, 21 studies were included, focusing on DEX with local anesthetics in orthopedic nerve blocks. Findings showed significant improvements in analgesia duration, sensory and motor block duration, and reduced postoperative opioid consumption, with an increased risk of bradycardia. Quality assessments indicated moderate bias risk.
CONCLUSIONS
DEX with local anesthetics significantly enhances nerve block effectiveness, extending analgesia and block durations while reducing opioid need. However, it requires careful monitoring due to increased bradycardia risk. These findings highlight the need for cautious use in clinical practice, considering both potential benefits and adverse effects.
Topics: Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Nerve Block; Anesthetics, Local; Orthopedic Procedures; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Pain, Postoperative; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38771166
DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.24.17879-0 -
European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy :... May 2024Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening, diffuse inflammatory pulmonary condition characterised by the Berlin criteria. Incidence of ARDS is...
INTRODUCTION
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening, diffuse inflammatory pulmonary condition characterised by the Berlin criteria. Incidence of ARDS is estimated at 2.5-19% globally with high mortality and morbidity. Interest has been increasing in the use of inhaled sedatives because of a more rapid awakening and fewer adverse effects compared with intravenous propofol. The primary aim of this systematic review protocol is to investigate the length of critical care stay between ARDS patients who have been mechanically ventilated with inhaled anaesthetic sedatives (ie, sevoflurane and isoflurane) compared with those patients who are prescribed conventional sedatives (ie, propofol).
METHODS AND ANALYSIS
Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid (Embase, MEDLINE), PubMed, EBSCO (CINAHL Plus), Google Scholar will be searched and stratified by the reviewers. The literature search will be limited to English articles. Published full text peer-reviewed articles will be included.The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) Registration number is: CRD42023390988.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION
Ethics approval is not required for this systematic review. The results will be presented at local/regional meetings and dissemination will occur through peer-reviewed publication.
PubMed: 38768999
DOI: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2024-004117 -
Journal of Critical Care May 2024There is a need to understand how family engagement in the intensive care unit (ICU) impacts patient outcomes. We reviewed the literature for randomized family-centered... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
There is a need to understand how family engagement in the intensive care unit (ICU) impacts patient outcomes. We reviewed the literature for randomized family-centered interventions with patient-related outcomes in the adult ICU.
DATA SOURCES
The MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception until July 3, 2023.
STUDY SELECTION
Articles involving randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the adult critical care setting evaluating family-centered interventions and reporting patient-related outcomes.
DATA EXTRACTION
Author, publication year, setting, number of participants, intervention category, intervention, and patient-related outcomes (patient-reported, physiological, clinical) were extracted.
DATA SYNTHESIS
There were 28 RCTs (12,174 participants) included. The most common intervention types were receiving care and meeting needs (N = 10) and family presence (N = 7). 16 RCTs (57%) reported ≥1 positive outcome from the intervention; no studies reported worse outcomes. Studies reported improvements in patient-reported outcomes such as anxiety, satisfaction, post-traumatic stress symptoms, depression, and health-related quality of life. RCTs reported improvements in physiological indices, adverse events, mechanical ventilation duration, analgesia use, ICU length of stay, delirium, and time to withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments.
CONCLUSIONS
Nearly two-thirds of RCTs evaluating family-centered interventions in the adult ICU reported positive patient-related outcomes.
KEYPOINTS
Question: Do family-centered interventions improve patient outcomes in the adult intensive care unit (ICU)?
FINDINGS
The systematic review found that nearly two-thirds of randomized clinical trials of family-centered interventions in the adult ICU improved patient outcomes. Studies found improvements in patient mental health, care satisfaction, physiological indices, and clinical outcomes. There were no studies reporting worse patient outcomes. Meaning: Many family-centered interventions can improve patient outcomes.
PubMed: 38759579
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2024.154829 -
Medicine May 2024The efficacy of fascia iliaca block (FIB) versus quadratus lumborum block (QLB) remains controversial for pain management of hip arthroplasty. We conduct a systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
The efficacy of fascia iliaca block (FIB) versus quadratus lumborum block (QLB) remains controversial for pain management of hip arthroplasty. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of FIB versus QLB on the postoperative pain intensity of hip arthroplasty.
METHODS
We have searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases through July 2023 for randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of FIB versus QLB on pain control of hip arthroplasty. This meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model or fixed-effect model based on the heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Four randomized controlled trials and 234 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with QLB for hip arthroscopy, FIB was associated with substantially lower pain scores at 2 hours (mean difference [MD] = -0.49; 95% CI = -0.63 to -0.35; P < .00001) and pain scores at 12 hours (MD = -0.81; 95% CI = -1.36 to -0.26; P = .004), but showed no impact on pain scores at 24 hours (MD = -0.21; 95% CI = -0.57 to 0.15; P = .25), time to first rescue analgesia (standard mean difference = 0.70; 95% CI = -0.59 to 1.99; P = .29), analgesic consumption (MD = -4.80; 95% CI = -16.57 to 6.97; P = .42), or nausea and vomiting (odd ratio = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.32-1.35; P = .25).
CONCLUSIONS
FIB may be better than QLB for pain control after hip arthroplasty, as evidenced by the lower pain scores at 2 and 24 hours.
Topics: Humans; Nerve Block; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Pain, Postoperative; Fascia; Pain Measurement; Abdominal Muscles; Pain Management
PubMed: 38758845
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038247 -
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery... May 2024Little is known about the optimal analgesia regimen after HTO. Thus, this study systematically reviewed the literature on clinical and patient-reported outcomes of pain... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Little is known about the optimal analgesia regimen after HTO. Thus, this study systematically reviewed the literature on clinical and patient-reported outcomes of pain management strategies for patients after HTO.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases was conducted from inception through September 2023. Studies were included if they evaluated pain reduction with analgesia strategies after HTO and were excluded if they did not report pain control outcomes.
RESULTS
Five studies with 217 patients were included. Patients with a multimodal intraoperative injection cocktail to the knee, femoral nerve block (FNB), or adductor canal block (ACB) for HTO had significant improvement in visual analog scale (VAS) and numerical rating scale (NRS) scores in the first 12 h postoperatively compared to controls. Patients on duloxetine had significantly lower NRS scores at 1, 7, and 14 days postoperatively and significantly lower nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) usage throughout the two-week postoperative period than the control group. Patients receiving an ACB had significantly lower opioid consumption than controls at 12 h postoperative. In patients with an FNB or ACB, no significant difference in quadriceps strength or time to straight leg raise postoperatively was observed compared to controls.
CONCLUSION
A multimodal periarticular injection cocktail, FNB, or an ACB effectively reduces pain on the first day after HTO, with an ACB able to reduce opioid consumption on the first postoperative day. Duloxetine combined with an ACB effectively decreases pain for two weeks postoperatively while reducing NSAID consumption in patients after HTO.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
IV.
PubMed: 38758390
DOI: 10.1007/s00590-024-04000-x -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023There is no meta-analysis reporting the analgesic effect and safety of bupivacaine in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy. This meta-analysis provides quantitative...
There is no meta-analysis reporting the analgesic effect and safety of bupivacaine in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy. This meta-analysis provides quantitative evidence of the effect of bupivacaine in hemorrhoidectomy. Studies were searched from PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science. Standardized mean difference (SMD), weighted mean difference (WMD), and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as effect indicators. Heterogeneity was assessed using the index, and sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the effect of the single study on the pooled results. A total of 18 studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pain level at 48 h was lower in the bupivacaine-combined other drug group than in the other drug group (WMD = -0.65, 95% CI: 1.18 to -0.11, and I = 37.50%). Compared to the bupivacaine group, the odds of pruritus (OR = 12.11, 95% CI: 1.49-98.59, and I = 0%) and urinary retention (OR = 4.45, 95% CI: 1.12-17.70, and I = 0%) were higher, and the pain level at 6 h (WMD = -2.13, 95% CI: 3.22 to -1.04, and I = 64.30%), at 12 h (WMD = -1.55, 95% CI: 2.19 to -0.90, and I = 56.10%), and at 24 h (SMD = -1.15, 95% CI: 1.89 to -0.42, and I = 82.5%) were lower in the bupivacaine-combined other drug group. Bupivacaine-combined other drugs had a good analgesic effect after hemorrhoidectomy, but the adverse reactions should be considered.
PubMed: 38751500
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1331965 -
Paediatric Anaesthesia May 2024Two prior reviews highlight the scarcity and conflicting nature of available data on chronic postsurgical pain in children, reporting a wide prevalence range of 3.2% to... (Review)
Review
Two prior reviews highlight the scarcity and conflicting nature of available data on chronic postsurgical pain in children, reporting a wide prevalence range of 3.2% to 64% (at ≥3 months). This updated systematic review aimed to consolidate information on the prevalence of pediatric chronic postsurgical pain. A thorough literature search of full English-text publications from April 2014 to August 2021 was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, with search terms: postoperative pain, child, preschool, pediatrics, adolescent, chronic pain. Seventeen relevant studies were identified. Most assessed chronicity once greater than 3 months duration postoperatively (82%), were predominantly prospective (71%) and conducted in inpatient settings (88%). The surgeries examined included orthopedic (scoliosis and limb), urological, laparotomy, inguinal, and cardiothoracic procedures, involving numbers ranging from 36 to 750, totaling 3137 participants/2792 completers. The studies had wide variations in median age at surgery (6 days to 16 years), the percentage of female participants (unspecified or 12.5% to 90%), and follow-up duration (2.5 months to 9 years). Various pain, functional, psychosocial, and health-related quality of life outcomes were documented. Chronic postsurgical pain prevalence varied widely from 2% to 100%. Despite increased data, challenges persist due to heterogeneity in definitions, patient demographics, mixed versus single surgical populations, diverse perioperative analgesic interventions, follow-up durations and reported outcomes. Interpretation is further complicated by limited information on impact, long-term analgesia and healthcare utilization, and relatively small sample sizes, hindering the assessment of reported associations. In some cases, preoperative pain and deformity may not have been addressed by surgery and persisting pain postoperatively may then be inappropriately termed chronic postsurgical pain. Larger-scale, procedure-specific data to better assess current prevalence, impact, and whether modifiable factors link to negative long-term outcomes, would be more useful and allow targeted perioperative interventions for at-risk pediatric surgical patients.
PubMed: 38738779
DOI: 10.1111/pan.14918